I DESPISE archers

[scipian]

I'm sorry for this rant and I agree that rants are usually annoying to read. But I'm really annoyed with archers and how they get so unbelievably strong. I was playing the old civ 4 earth map (only 18 civs) and I was Egypt. I had built around 20 Egyptian chariots, captured Turkey, southeast Arabia, and southwest Arabia. I gathered all my 20 chariots and attack about 6 archers at Mecca. I didn't think to look at their statistics because I figured there was no way they could win. Apparently they were all fully fortified, had 2 (or 3) city defense + the normal achers city defense, had cultural defense, had hill defense, and most had drill 1. So, every single of my 20 chariots died while causing no causalties and only about a thrid damage to each archer. I was REALLY mad so I went and got about 30 more in about 15 turns. Same effect. Then, right after I lost that one, while the archers were still damaged, I got fed up and put up about 15 chariots with 20 experience from the worldbuilder. And THEY all died. This was just getting ridiculous and so I quit the game.

BTW-This did happen in Warlords. Sure, archers have always been kinda annoying in cities but seriously. This wasn't fun at all; it was just stupid.

 

[Ace4nyC]

I'm sorry for this rant and I agree that rants are usually annoying to read. But I'm really annoyed with archers and how they get so unbelievably strong. I was playing the old civ 4 earth map (only 18 civs) and I was Egypt. I had built around 20 Egyptian chariots, captured Turkey, southeast Arabia, and southwest Arabia. I gathered all my 20 chariots and attack about 6 archers at Mecca. I didn't think to look at their statistics because I figured there was no way they could win. Apparently they were all fully fortified, had 2 (or 3) city defense + the normal achers city defense, had cultural defense, had hill defense, and most had drill 1. So, every single of my 20 chariots died while causing no causalties and only about a thrid damage to each archer. I was REALLY mad so I went and got about 30 more in about 15 turns. Same effect. Then, right after I lost that one, while the archers were still damaged, I got fed up and put up about 15 chariots with 20 experience from the worldbuilder. And THEY all died. This was just getting ridiculous and so I quit the game.

BTW-This did happen in Warlords. Sure, archers have always been kinda annoying in cities but seriously. This wasn't fun at all; it was just stupid.

See dude there is your problem, your using your chariots as offensive city raiders. Thats a no no. You're better off using chariots to hunt down melee units and raid thier terretory.

For that TOO often chance where you dont have iron,copper. Use archers in stack of 12-16 and assult the nearest city you find. While using your chariots as defensive force. Negotiate a peace treaty, and build up your army with swordsman and a

 

[AfterShafter]

If you fight archers the wrong way, it doesn't work well. Early on there is no really efficient way to kill fortified archers unless you're aggressive and have early copper or some groovy UU. Capital cities are just nuts - you need ridiculously overwhelming odds or very elite (for early on) units to take them down.

Personally, I think this is just the developers' way of trying to discourage early rushing. It's possible enough as it is to cut what could be a long and diverse game down to a few turns at the start - no need to turn this into a Zerg rush by making archers weaker.

Bottom line? If you want to rush cities really early on before you've researched the techs which allow you to construct a really well rounded army, you're going to pay out the arse for it with no guarantee of success. Get used to it

 

[General Failure]

cough, cough... That's why people invented siege units and city raider promotions... cough

Personally I only despise archers that don't fight for my side...

General Failure

 

[Gr3yL3gion]

Play as Incan then.

 

[bovinespy]

Play as Incan then.

Or Persia. Those Immortals make fine urban assault units against non-Protective civs until longbows show up. (I haven't gone after a Protective civ yet with Cyrus, so I can't speak to their effectiveness in that situation.)

 

[Barney's_Soul]

I'm sorry for this rant and I agree that rants are usually annoying to read. But I'm really annoyed with archers and how they get so unbelievably strong. I was playing the old civ 4 earth map (only 18 civs) and I was Egypt. I had built around 20 Egyptian chariots, captured Turkey, southeast Arabia, and southwest Arabia. I gathered all my 20 chariots and attack about 6 archers at Mecca. I didn't think to look at their statistics because I figured there was no way they could win. Apparently they were all fully fortified, had 2 (or 3) city defense + the normal achers city defense, had cultural defense, had hill defense, and most had drill 1. So, every single of my 20 chariots died while causing no causalties and only about a thrid damage to each archer. I was REALLY mad so I went and got about 30 more in about 15 turns. Same effect. Then, right after I lost that one, while the archers were still damaged, I got fed up and put up about 15 chariots with 20 experience from the worldbuilder. And THEY all died. This was just getting ridiculous and so I quit the game.

BTW-This did happen in Warlords. Sure, archers have always been kinda annoying in cities but seriously. This wasn't fun at all; it was just stupid.

Haha....so that's what you get for not looking at the COMBAT ODDS!!!!

Geez dude....instead of giving the archers 10 upgrades each....maybe you should have pilleged and starve out his city.

 

[Bjorn190]

You play as egypt because u like the str 5 war chariot yes?

You get as much from yout advantage as you can.

BUT then u meet arabia, which is PROTECTIVE, which negates your war chariot advantage. This means u have to rethink your strategical choice. In this scenario, you did not play with good strategy

Next time, you have to pick cyrus, ok? You still easily kill axemen, 50/50 on chariots, and archers much better

It seems to me you just want egypt to have an "I win" rush strategy

But

 

[drkodos]

I'm sorry for this rant and I agree that rants are usually annoying to read.

Who were you agreeing with? Yourself?

I think rants are some of the most interesting things to read. And they are also a blast to author.

I didn't think to look at their statistics because I figured there was no way they could win.

Clearly this is the fault of the archers and placing all the blame on them is no doubt the correct way to remedy this.

So, every single of my 20 chariots died while causing no causalties and only about a thrid damage to each archer. I was REALLY mad so I went and got about 30 more in about 15 turns. Same effect. Then, right after I lost that one, while the archers were still damaged, I got fed up and put up about 15 chariots with 20 experience from the worldbuilder. And THEY all died.

 

[SpartanEvolved]

Archers with 3 City Garrison, Hill Defense, Drill 1, Cultural Defense, plus their normal defense = 3+3(.75)+3(.25)+3(100) = 9 strength. That isn't even including the cultural defense or the first strikes.

 

[Meatbuster]

You don't have to rethink your strategy. War Chariot rush is an excellent tactic. However, when you reach a point where you are either out-teched or out-defended, it's time to hang back, regroup and enjoy your newly captured cities while teching up to new and better toys.

 

[DrewBledsoe]

Play as Incan then.

Inca sqeulchers even with crII stand no chance against archers fortified on a city / hill with a bit of culture.

 

[Duuk]

Archers prevent early zerg rushes (kekekekekeke!) but are fairly easy to counter. Personally, I find that hordes of axemen (built from a barracks city so you can have the city raider promotion) do well enough early game, unless you're attacking a major culture-defended city. Then you rush for catapults and trebuchets and you're back to being unstoppable.

Chariots should never, ever, ever attack a city unless the city is defended by a few wounded axemen.

 

[wioneo]

should never, ever, ever attack a city unless the city is defended by a few wounded axemen.

Or if there is a low city defense.

 

[Barney's_Soul]

Or if there is a low city defense.

or if there is NO city defense(cats are cute)

 

[Ace4nyC]

You don't have to rethink your strategy. War Chariot rush is an excellent tactic. However, when you reach a point where you are either out-teched or out-defended, it's time to hang back, regroup and enjoy your newly captured cities while teching up to new and better toys.

ya but to able to this you need to have stable economy that can support growth and infact it earns to it. Then build a huge force and go killing your niehbors, start with the smaller less defended cities or hang back few turns and wait for computer to assemble attack force. Crush them in glories victory and move on to thier cities.

GL

 

[StarWorms]

I've just been playing as Egypt with war chariots and managed to take out France. However, I used Axemen and Swordsmen too. War Chariots were good once the battle was going and I needed quick units but they were never as goos as swordsmen - they'd have about 20% chance of winning. However 2 chariots would take out 1 archer. You should always look at the battle stats and the size of the enemy stack.

 

[Antilogic]

I'm sorry, I just couldn't help it when I read this.

As posted above, archers are incredibly strong in cities, because they get that +50% city defense bonus on top of city garrison promotions and city culture and fortification...they are beasts. That 3 strength can be deceptive...

I think most mounted units are immune to first strikes, so that shouldn't have been an issue here.

 

[wioneo]

Only immortals are immune to first strikes, actually, and some other UU. I am completely geussing about immortals, by the way. I was always drawn to their forification bonus getting...

 

[wookiee]

If you dont check the odds/ make a diverse stack then you deserve to lose