Camel Archer Useless ?

[wizard73]

What do you think of the Camel Archer?
It's not really better than the Knight is it?

What is the good point of this unit ?

 

[Mmmm Butter]

I think the idea on that one is that you don't need horses to train mounted archers. I'm not sure what the tech requirements are, I'm pretty sure you'd need animal husbandry, but maybe you don't need horseback riding, I'm not sure on that. So you'd get the camel archer much earlier than anyone would get horse archers.

 

[Dragonlor]

According to the Manual:

The Camel Archer requires Guilds, Horseback Riding, and Archery. It's advantages over the Knight is that Camel Archers don't require any resources and they receive a 25% chance to withdraw from combat. Sounds alright to me. I'd like to have them over a knight.

 

[AWeeMoose]

I'm playing my first game on Prince right now, as Arabia. Camel archers proved to be invaluable, as my stronger, more aggressive neighbors attacked me with knights, and I was able to counter with Camel archers (and pikemen of course) without having any horses.

Sure, it was unusual not to have horses (in fact, nobody traded me horses until post-1900), but like all UU's, camel archers have their time and place.

 

[vinnvegas]

I suffered one of the greatest defeats ever last night at the hands of a camel archer army. I had muskets and arti and they cut thru like butter. I even used the land to my advantage and forced them to attack me thru a 2 tile wide window into my territory and couldn't hold them back. I had no horses, so I couldn't build mounted units to try and push back at them. If used correctly they are so strong. I could not get anything close enough to melee them without being demolished in one turn. The fact that they move like horses, can range attack without wasting a turn, and than can move after range attack makes them better them arti. They can constantly range attack from just outside your range. I'm still without words in my defeat. They are not a weak unit either. I need to look up their strength, but I know from experience that 3 shots from arti didn't kill one. ugh

 

[strijder20]

I think you are confusing civilization 4 with civilization 5. Also, I don't get why you have so many trouble killing them with artilleries, as those have 36 ranged strength which should one-shot-kill the 15 ranged strength camel archer.

 

[pigswill]

Arti as in artillery? You should have had rifles as well (as rifling is a pre-req) .

 

[shakabrade]

vinnvegas the necromancer

You probably didn't have artillery. Artillery has 18 strength and would chew 10 strength. You must call something else arti (trebs, cannons?). Better overall term is siege which includes: catapult, trebuchet, cannon, artillery and mobile artillery. Siege cannot kill in BTS, it can only reduce health, it even says that under an icon.

You don't counter mounted units with mounted units, but you use spear units (spearmen, pikemen) for their 100% bonus.

I'd generally advise you to read more civilopedia, for you could have easily avoided all those calamities bestowed upon you, simply by more knowledge.

 

[shakabrade]

deleted

 

[enKage]

Camel archers are really good, higher withdraw chances is a huge bonus, especially combined with flanking2

The problem is that knights are pretty useless as AIs quickly develop enginiering

Also because of camel archers arabia is not so handicaped on some mapscripts = oasis

 

[Zx Zero Zx]

The Camel Archer is VERY VERY GOOD. The only problem with it is that Arabia sucks baaad. If Arabia had a Phil or Ind leader it would be an extremely scary unit. As you could field them much much earlier, and it would be very consistent. The problem with Knight rushes is you need both Iron, and Horses, and for you to get there much earlier than the AI gets Eng.

 

[vicawoo]

The Camel Archer is VERY VERY GOOD. The only problem with it is that Arabia sucks baaad. If Arabia had a Phil or Ind leader it would be an extremely scary unit. As you could field them much much earlier, and it would be very consistent. The problem with Knight rushes is you need both Iron, and Horses, and for you to get there much earlier than the AI gets Eng.

What's wrong with Saladin? Any spiritual civ is already reasonably good.

 

[coanda]

Those who ignore espionage and religions will likely find Arabia to be a pretty weak civ - Guilds is too expensive a self-tech, even for the passable Camel Archer unit (instead of the pretty weak Knight unit). Madrassa is just a library if you heavily depend on getting Great Scientists, PRO is pretty bad except for espionage or drafting, and the starting techs are admittedly awful. You're left with... SPI.

But when you try to play espionage with them, everything just fits together elegantly. SPI for religion/civic swaps, PRO for cheap castles, Mysticism starting tech encourages pursuing Oracle (which in turn enables CoL or Theology for easy holy city), Madrassa for quick holy shrine or bulbing another religion if you didn't Oracle and didn't conquer a holy city, and a UU whose prereq. tech can often be stolen fairly early from the AIs because it's such a popular AI choice.

 

[vicawoo]

Spiritual can bulb fast for liberalism tech and whip universities for oxford. Usually non-spiritual civs end up using their golden age for great people, then they have to choose between milking further great people or switching in the last turn to slavery.

Madrassas are kind of negated when you get caste system, but it can be very useful in isolation plays (burn your first great priest back into a golden age), and it's decent at cultural conquest of barbarian cities (25 turns).

 

[TheMeInTeam]

What's wrong with Saladin? Any spiritual civ is already reasonably good.

SPI is decent, but bad starting techs + bad secondary trait don't help it.

Sal is more reasonable for other kinds of games but his traits aren't really well suited to "get guilds ASAP before AI on high difficulties can pike you to death". I imagine CA rush plays similarly to, but weaker than, the Byzantine cataphract rushes with good starts.

 

[Zx Zero Zx]

SPI is decent, but bad starting techs + bad secondary trait don't help it.

Sal is more reasonable for other kinds of games but his traits aren't really well suited to "get guilds ASAP before AI on high difficulties can pike you to death". I imagine CA rush plays similarly to, but weaker than, the Byzantine cataphract rushes with good starts.

If he was Spi Ind or Spi Phil he would actually be a good leader for CA rushes. But with Pro, his junky techs, and his junktastic UU he just can't do it that well.

 

[Mylene]

Hmm..not the best starting techs, but Wheel is good.
Nothing wrong with Sally imo besides Prot. being much more map/settings dependant than other traits.

 

[vicawoo]

If a leader plays well using normal strategies (which I assert), but poorly using gambits, that doesn't make him a bad leader. There might be poor decision making behind the leader though.

A lot of players insist on leveraging something even if it makes them play worse.

 

[Zx Zero Zx]

If a leader plays well using normal strategies (which I assert), but poorly using gambits, that doesn't make him a bad leader. There might be poor decision making behind the leader though.

A lot of players insist on leveraging something even if it makes them play worse.

He is an even worse leader when you do utilize his UU. >.> Gimicks, and gambits are for making record HoF times not for making consistent wins. Sadly Saladin exceeds at neither.

 

[shakabrade]

I just can't believe anyone can say for any Spiritual civ it is weak. Spiritual is as good as your skill to use it.