That's an interesting question, can't wait to hear what others have to say.
I think most small skirmishes when you have the lead you would be better with crossbows, especially on open terrain or if you got some of those cheesy cliffs. I conquered my continent quite easily in my last hk diff game with noble javelineers(who have similar LoS issues) so I don't value the indirect fire that much. It's usually not hard to find a few good tiles to put them. If you aren't behind in military tech you can usually afford to just go in melee range too. Just about everything 1 shots an archer and their damage is so low you would need to have a ton of them, that can get pretty costly in population.
I have however kept markabatas(egypt) around in the past. They hit quite a bit harder than the basic archer and their movement makes them very survivable.
The range is the same, however Crossbowmen lose the "indirect" shot ability. You need a clear LoS to use them. They are pretty effective but usage requires better planning of unit positions and movement during the battle.So far I'd say no, I can hardly ever attack with crossbows due to their completely ridiculous range. Has anyone had a battle in which it was clearly better having crossbows than it would have been having less damage but a decent range?
The range is the same, however Crossbowmen lose the "indirect" shot ability. You need a clear LoS to use them. They are pretty effective but usage requires better planning of unit positions and movement during the battle.
Yup, I created this thread while playing an Egypt start, for this same reason, I decided to try and upgrade a few units to crossbows and instantly regretted it during the next battle. But even with normal archers I'm undecided, the difference in range is just to big (and on HK difficulty I don't see crossbows surviving a full AI turn at melee range).
I place them in a way that only allows 1 melee unit to hit them in a turn. The AI only gets +2 on HK, nothing you can't make up for, especially as late as medieval. I try to get the homeland bonus as soon as possible to compensate, with professional soldiers and hopefully a veteran star or ferocious, there's not much that can even fight them 1v1 until heavy infantry/chivalry since they don't take retaliation(gets 2 hits in for every 1 of theirs) and even then you'll survive 1 hit no problem allowing you to "cycle" them.
Maybe you have a bug. I can use them without 2 elevation difference. Same with all other units that require LoS (e.g. Gunners).If you don't get a 2 elevation difference you simply can't use them with a stronger unit ahead of them. There's no planning around that. Either you are VERY lucky with the map (eg. you get a cliff that the AI can't access just next to the battlefield) or they simply can't shoot. I'd love to plan all of my battles for them to happen right next to cliffs that the AI can't access, but of course the map simply doesn't allow it.
If your are not in a 1 tile choke point (not always possible) your front line will probably get hit more than once per turn.
What Cakeathon said about taking a shot while cycling the front line.
Also, archers get squishy very quickly in Medieval, if you can guarantee they won't be attacked that's fine but they can soemtimes be 1-shot killed by crossbows or pikes. Crossbows can take a punch or 2 so it depends on what sort of battles you're fighting, terrain etc.
They might not be the biggest priority for upgrading though, it would probably make more sense to upgrade spears to pikes first.
If your opponent has melee or crossbows themselves though, crossbows are very useful
Maybe you have a bug. I can use them without 2 elevation difference. Same with all other units that require LoS (e.g. Gunners).
Wanted to add something to this topic, a pure archer spam army where you avoid all archer upgrade techs does work and is quite broken.
It is however extremely tedious to play.
Spoiler :
![]()
Wanted to add something to this topic, a pure archer spam army where you avoid all archer upgrade techs does work and is quite broken.
It is however extremely tedious to play.
Spoiler :
![]()
Not sure if you mean militarily or economically. it does demand a full commitment to the strategy.
FIMS quickly become meaningless if all you want to do is spam archers all game long, the only real limitation is going to be your number of city due to the 1 pop per turn per city growth cap.
Militarily speaking, it's efficient enough to win against the AI once you reach critical mass, just make sure to always be the attacker. You can also supplement with a few melee units like swordsman and knights since they don't force an archer upgrade. This can help the early game and sieges. Not as efficient as never losing a unit of course but this strategy will also generate more pops than you normally would since you have nothing else to optimize for.
Having so many units makes the world map gameplay hugely in your favor, you can afford to retreat stacks without compromising your position which allows you to deny movement or guarantee first strike, you can surround your opponent to kill their stack unit by unit by denying their spawn zone, you can deny reinforcements, etc.