Longbowmans under ratted???

[Alvin]

Longbowman has become one of my most favorite units in the midevial age. They're cheap and they're effective. But when I studied the strategies of the english during the hundered year war. The longbowman was mostly used in defense. For example during the battle of Crecy, the longbowman stood their ground against an army three times it's size. The arrows cut the french knights to pieces and caused confusion throughout the french lines. Then the English infratary cut thorugh the enemy like knife. But in Civ3, the Longbowman can't even stand an attack from an warrior. Did the producers actually study history before they made this games???

If you have any comments or suggestions, I would like the hear them

 

[Oddible]

Longbowmen get early attack - if you have them in a town they get a shot at the enemy before the enemy attacks - that is the simulation. You still need pikes to defend. The concept of a Keep isn't well represented in Civ - if you want that you have to go to the Paradox games (Europa Universalis, et. Al.)

 

[Tomoyo]

Also, the best defence is a good offense.

I also like Longbowmen, and very often get a leader from a longbow in the Modern Age because I use them so much there are a lot of elites. Then I try and send my elite* Longbowman against a Modern Armor... and win because I have the God of Artillery on my side.

 

[truckingpete]

The Longbowman should be like the Age of Empires 2 longbowman. Good attack and can destroy knights in no time. I read about that battle, right know I am making a scenerio on the Hundred Years' War. It is going to have some new units from some unit creators at the Creation and Custimization forum. I am going to make the longbowman a very good attack but not to powerful, but very good defense.

But the longbowman are the best.

It should be the English UU becuase they used it the most. The rest just had a very advance archer, a crossbowman they were called. They even had Arbalest, another advance archer.

- TP

Join the DemoGame

 

[troytheface]

interesting observation. the ai seems to handle them well also. (attack) I agree, -and they upgrade to guerilla then tow which are good enough. Which is to say they are a unit that go from an attack unit to a to defense unit which is not a logical upgrade-however, u questioned whether they should be an attack unit in the first place and one could argue that the first launch of arrows is an offensive strike, i think it was the huns who used arrows where the first volley was shot high and when their opponenets lifted their shieds the the huns would shoot thier second volley (low), which sounds more offensive than defensive. And too, the graphics imply that there is a forward motion of the unit..which is kinda strange for a arrow attacker. The only horse archer unit in the game is not even eastern...its in the far west..?..

 

[2 pac 652]

why are they underrated

 

[Reprisal]

They're underrated because the longbow was such a decisive weapon in reality; now, contrast this with how the Longbowmen is a poor man's Medieval Infantry in Civ3. I suppose the posters have said that it's somewhat disappointing that such a powerful development in medieval warfare was given such poor representation...

Really, unless you're short on Iron, building Medieval Infantry is almost always better -- the only counterpoint that I can think of is that you get a defensive bombard from fortified longbowmen. The only time that I've been known to use Longbowmen is when I'm short Iron, or don't want to have to wait for a 70 shield knight to build. I generally use the (Medieval Infantry + Pikemen + Trebuchet) method of medieval warfare, but if I lack Iron, then it's masses of longbowmen and spearmen until I can acquire some...

- Rep.

 

[Lennon]

I too find it a bit odd how ranged units are treated so differently. A Musketman is a good defender, but a Longbowman is just about as useful as a warrior unless fortified with other units so that it can bombard defensively. I try to mix my Medieval Infantry with Longbowmen because the longbows are cheaper and it also gives the game a bit more depth and fun, but the longbowman really isn't too useful and Gunpowder comes directly after Invention, making them even less formidable for attacking purposes.

I also find it a bit odd that ships have different stats for attack and defense. If two ships of the same type bombard each other at sea, why is the initial attacker stronger??? Sure he might have had the better chance to form up before attacking, but that might as well be the other way around. I think naval combat should be revamped a bit. Maybe it could be important which angle you attacked from or something, I don't know what the best solution would be. But I'm not so impressed with the current system. Faster ships should withdraw etc.

 

[Chieftess]

A longbow+spear = 1 Medival Infantry. It's there as a resource-less unit just incase you lack resources. Why have a middle ages civ that can only build arches, warriors, and spears? Then you'll be saying the game is too easy when the AI has no resources.

 

[Reprisal]

... Or too hard when you have no resources?

In any event, I agree that it should be there for those without iron or horses. Needless to say, I would have to say that if you lack either of these vitally important resources that you start building up a stack of spears, longbows and trebuchets to take some iron and/or horses. There are no other resources in the game that are as important as these two...

I think most of the complaints so far have been that there's no use for the longbowmen once you already have iron and/or horses... as a result, I suppose there are people out there who think that they should be less expensive shield-wise. I'm not sure that's a good idea though, since it took a matter of years to train a fully competent longbow archer.

One thing that I do know, however, is that I fully respect the power of the longbow in real life and in this excellent game,

- Rep.

 

[zurichuk]

A longbow+spear = 1 Medival Infantry. It's there as a resource-less unit just incase you lack resources. Why have a middle ages civ that can only build arches, warriors, and spears? Then you'll be saying the game is too easy when the AI has no resources.

i have never thought of it that way, it even has a defensive bombard thrown in, may build more after reading this thread

 

[Guagle]

But the longbowman are the best.

Very true.

Historically, longbowmen were so effective that the English were the last European Civ to develop musket units. They did use cannons and bombards early, but not muskets until they had become a common component of medieval armies.

IMHO longbowmen should be the English UU. Other nations could use crossbowmen as the crossbow represented quite a revolution in warfare for that time period.

 

[IbnSina]

I confess that the longbow in civ always bothered me, for the reasons Alvin gives. Thus, I modded my game so that my longbows are 2.3.1 with a 0 bombard. To give an offensive unit to civs without resources, I created an "irregular", with 3.1.2. I got carried away and put crossbows in as well. It works for me...

 

[truckingpete]

Very true.

Historically, longbowmen were so effective that the English were the last European Civ to develop musket units. They did use cannons and bombards early, but not muskets until they had become a common component of medieval armies.

IMHO longbowmen should be the English UU. Other nations could use crossbowmen as the crossbow represented quite a revolution in warfare for that time period.

Exactly! The longbowman should be the English UU. It make more sense. Actually a lot of sense. Yes, the English had a good navy, but they were better archers. It makes more sense to have the Englsih UU the longbowman.

- TP

 

[Dogmeat]

I liked the Longbowman better than the Medieval Infantry even before it got defensive bombard. Simply because you can hide these guys behind warriors and damaged spear/pikemen, whereas if you would do the same with MI, They would be sent out to defend and die if someone attacks the stack.
The Longbowmen are even more superior now with defensive bombard.

 

[LostKnight]

And by the way alvin, America is not the longest lasting empire. Rome stood more then 500 years, mongol about 300 and some in china lasted even longer then that.

 

[MikeH]

Actually Rome lasted closer to 1000 years, longer if you accept the mythical founding date of 753BC as the start of the empire.

 

[Vizurok]

And if you count in the East Roman Empire...
More than 2000 years...

 

[alamo]

I like longbows - when the AI builds them. They're easy to kill with a 2-move unit like horse or knight.

I'm still on PTW so no bombard. They're pretty worthless unless they can overwhelm the enemy's offense. I never build 'em.

Increasing their defence would make them better than the MI, so I'm not sure that you can balance them out any better.

 

[MikeH]

And if you count in the East Roman Empire...
More than 2000 years...

True, but they're a seperate civ in the game, or in C3C at least ,