Horse Archers - why the hate?

[Porphyrius]

"One more consideration: in a Classical-Era war, you are unlikely to be able to build twice-promoted Swordsmen. More likely, they will be CR1 only."

Cant expect CRII swords out of barracks no, but you 'll get get them after the first enemy city falls and CRIII will follow promptly.

Besides defining classical era is kina hard considering the more efficient way to wage war is beelines towards a relative potents war tech. I.E. if you plan on a mass war beelining construction for cats and fielding a few isnt necessarily taking longer than amassing the proper amount of HA. Depends.



Reading the worst UU thread it dawned on me Boudica's GallicW promoted to GIII are kind of swords/HA hybrids.
More mobile than swords on hilly terain and with a very large withdraw chance that puts flankers to shame.
I have certainly enjoyed a game using them as such, too bad most folks around here think so lowly of them.

 

[Puzzlemaker]

Well, my opinions on horse archers...

A. You can have a barracks AND a stable, which can give more experience
B. They aren't mellee, so Axeman don't get a bonus against them
C. You can always trade techs with another Civ

They are especially deadly when you have other civics/traits that give experience and free promotions. You can easily end up with a very elite horse archer force, that can last you awhile.

 

[Wodan]

"One more consideration: in a Classical-Era war, you are unlikely to be able to build twice-promoted Swordsmen. More likely, they will be CR1 only."

Cant expect CRII swords out of barracks no, but you 'll get get them after the first enemy city falls and CRIII will follow promptly.

I think the point was for the mathematical comparison. If you grant 2 promotions to the Swords, then you should grant 3 to the HAs. If you want to keep the HAs at 2, then the Swords would only get 1. For the maths.

OTOH there's a cost for that, you get 1 less HA per city making them, because you have to spend those hammers on the Stable. So if you have 3 production cities that's 3 less HAs than Swords.

Wodan

 

[Puzzlemaker]

In the long run having a stable is a must - knights can be game breakers, if you get them fast enough. Getting a stable + barracks + aggressive = ownage.

 

[bardolph]

"One more consideration: in a Classical-Era war, you are unlikely to be able to build twice-promoted Swordsmen. More likely, they will be CR1 only."

Cant expect CRII swords out of barracks no, but you 'll get get them after the first enemy city falls and CRIII will follow promptly.

Besides defining classical era is kina hard considering the more efficient way to wage war is beelines towards a relative potents war tech. I.E. if you plan on a mass war beelining construction for cats and fielding a few isnt necessarily taking longer than amassing the proper amount of HA. Depends.

I mentioned "Classical Era War" mainly to underline the point that we're not talking about a beeline to Vassalage or Theocracy, which means that the Swordsmen in the comparison could not have been built with 5 XP, and therefore could not have had CR2 in the first wave of attack.

And if you want to talk about cities beyond the first one, note that a Stable can build a medic HA right out the gate, and that Horse Archers can rush to the 2nd city twice as fast as foot units (after having the assisted heal from the medic, which can also keep up with the double-speed attack force). This means less time to whip defense, and fewer defenders to defeat. This speed also compounds itself when the main force gains enough experience for March promotions.

 

[ungy]

I confess I've never tried a massed force of HA. Mostly I find the timing of the unit a bit off.
I've been playing immortal, and it seems like the time the HA are useful is not the time I can war. Unless I have a UU, early war tends to be an axe rush or most likely I'll get enough land in the rex. I generally try to rex aggressively which leaves me way weaker than the AI. By time I could build any kind of a HA force we are talking about LB defenders. So it's usually a globe/draft thing. But people make some good points about their usefulness.
As for trading, it seems the AI prioritizes it less than at earlier versions but as for trading it's again kind of the wrong price. You either need to sink a lot of hammers into a tech or do a 2/1 since it's cheaper than the techs you want to trade for.

 

[Mr. Civtastic]

Try going for an early war without copper or iron and you'll see that a theocracy/stable-promoted army of HAs can make things happen. Then you can get that Medic III gg and promote him as your first knight eventually. By the time you get through cavalry you should have multiple four-promoted units.

 

[vicawoo]

I'm trying out jaguars and horse archers and whatnot, and my biggest gripe is that you're choosing between a military tech and monarchy.

 

[dankok8]

Other than city attacking for which they can be used, HA's have a great use as pillaging units .. declare war on the strongest AI and pillage his countryside dry especially resources, farms and then roads + other things; he likely wont have many spearmen to oppose you and he'll lose quite a few axeman/swords if he uses those to take you out.

Advantages of Using Horse Archers:
1) speed --> surprise --> more damage done to unsuspecting opponent + can retreat more easily
2) flanking --> your units will survive some battles they don't win
3) bonus against siege

Disadvantages:
1) cost 50 hammers
2) easily countered with spearmen/pikemen once the enemy knows you're using them
3) do not attack Greece, Zululand, or Mayas (I may have missed someone) cuz their UU's will rip you apart