To Hell With Archers

[Fiend777Fits]

I'm so sick of archers, I'm about to start playing Civ3 again. These guys are so strong early game, you can't do nothing but sit back and wait for better techs to roll in. I start out with a couple nice invasions in the beginning of the game and I have to go home as soon as the archers start popping up. They're so strong you need 3 to 1 advantages over them. And even with this many, expect to get slaughtered with only 1 or 2 men left. It's ridiculous. And if the city is on a hill, forget it. It will never fall until swordsman.

Now some people will probably say, well why don't you just wait until swordsman. I'll tell you why. Because I shouldn't have to. For every situation there should be a strategy or solution in this game. And maybe I won't be so lucky as to have any iron. And if I can't even fight to get some, I might as well drop trousers and grit my teeth. The archers will continue to defy and defeat overwhelming odds (until I figure out how to mod them new stats). They're just too freakin strong. Sure later on, the techs will come. But this unit makes everyone sit on their hands waiting. I can't even enjoy my favorite mods anymore because I run into this same problem in all of them (except TAM where skirmishers prove to be very useful).

So I say, archer bonuses should be reduced. +25% city defense. no more. Axemen should get +25% city attack but with a -25% defense as well. And tribal warrior as well while we're at it. +25% city attack for them too. They really are the most useless unit. Just filler really.

 

[kristopherb]

calm down. i must admit that archers are brill' defendersuntill swordsmen(50-50chance),if you like an early war wait till swordsmen.Or if your desperate use "immortals""quecha".

 

[member66170]

Use properly promoted axeman. Taking a city should be hard. Whats fun in a game where you can conquer the world by 2000BC ?

 

[Ramesses 3000]

Use the Goldberg Tank. Nothing can withstand the Goldberg Tank.

 

[Psyringe]

Archers are strong defenders, yep. I think that was a conscious design decision to prevent early rushes that decide the whole game while still in the bronze age. I often get bored by games that are decided early, so for me, it works well as a gameplay mechanic.

 

[Panda]

Archers are deliberately that strong to prevent early game rushes. Use City Raider promotions on Axemen and Swordsmen, or give Chariots / Horse Archers Flanking promotions.

 

[Roland Johansen]

I'm so sick of archers, I'm about to start playing Civ3 again. These guys are so strong early game, you can't do nothing but sit back and wait for better techs to roll in. I start out with a couple nice invasions in the beginning of the game and I have to go home as soon as the archers start popping up. They're so strong you need 3 to 1 advantages over them. And even with this many, expect to get slaughtered with only 1 or 2 men left. It's ridiculous. And if the city is on a hill, forget it. It will never fall until swordsman.

Now some people will probably say, well why don't you just wait until swordsman. I'll tell you why. Because I shouldn't have to. For every situation there should be a strategy or solution in this game. And maybe I won't be so lucky as to have any iron. And if I can't even fight to get some, I might as well drop trousers and grit my teeth. The archers will continue to defy and defeat overwhelming odds (until I figure out how to mod them new stats). They're just too freakin strong. Sure later on, the techs will come. But this unit makes everyone sit on their hands waiting. I can't even enjoy my favorite mods anymore because I run into this same problem in all of them (except TAM where skirmishers prove to be very useful).

So I say, archer bonuses should be reduced. +25% city defense. no more. Axemen should get +25% city attack but with a -25% defense as well. And tribal warrior as well while we're at it. +25% city attack for them too. They really are the most useless unit. Just filler really.

A colonel addresses his troops in the trenches of WW1:
You stupid lazy bastards. You think, you're soldiers? You're nothing. You're less than nothing. You've stormed that enemy line ten times now and each time you had a serious advantage in numbers. And each time the sauerkrauts made you calling for your mommies. That's just unrealistic. What would you have me tell general Fiend777Fits? That it is hard to take a line on a field! Come on, that's just crazy talk. Now, go out there and capture that trench and don't come back without victory.

And so another battalion of men died while running towards dug in men wielding machine guns on the battlefield of Verdun. The fighting over the few trenches around that village resulted in 700000 casualties (French + German), more than the total number of casualties of the US in WWII.

Yes, a defensive line can be very hard to take, especially in a time where the defender has the upper hand. Ancient and medieval archers on walls were a formidable defence in reality, often repelling forces far greater than their own. In game, it is of course about more than realism, it's also about game balance. It would be a badly balanced game of the entire history of man, if you could finish it easily in the ancient era.

 

[FoxTrot12]

calm down your like a women on her periods.

Ha ha ha! You had me laughing a full minute. Not that I'm sexist.
I agree with you, kristopherb. Fiend777Fits ol' boy is overreacting. Why make Civ 4 without an annoying unit to challenge you? Isn't that a basic part of all strategy games? Archers are pesky, but they are more like meat shields than anything else. Usually I am way ahead in tech anyway, so they're not a problem.
By the way, when you were complaining by needing 3 vs. 1, isn't that a basic rule of thumb if you want to win? I've always been told that if their defense adds up to 5 strength, bring 15 strength. So that really isn't a bad thing, its normal.

 

[ollj]

yeah right. theres nothing like taking 2 other capitals early like in in civ1.
thankfully that developed into something better, a dead end tech for early defense.

 

[FoxTrot12]

I don't understand what you're saying.

 

[FoxTrot12]

There was a similar thread to this earlier. I bashed the author of that like this one's.

 

[Fiend777Fits]

2 archers in a city on a hill cannot be taken by 6 horse archers. If there is 4 archers on a city on a hill, you will need at least 15 horse archers and even then expect to be almost completely massacred. Ridiculous.

 

[Sisiutil]

2 archers in a city on a hill cannot be taken by 6 horse archers. If there is 4 archers on a city on a hill, you will need at least 15 horse archers and even then expect to be almost completely massacred. Ridiculous.

Uh, no, sorry, this is not ridiculous, it's realistic: a smaller defensive force can withstand a much larger offensive one, especially on the right terrain. Just ask the Spartans. (I cannot wait until 300 hits theatres this spring!)

Furthermore, Horse Archers, like all mounted units in the game, suck at city raiding, and that's on purpose. Since the Warlords 2.08 patch, they actually have a -10% city attack demerit! Why, for the love of all that is holy, are you using them to attack cities?!? "Gee, when I beat my head against this wall, it hurts! Why is that?" Traditionally, mounted units operate better in open terrain, not in tight enclosed spaces like ancient city streets, where archers hiding behind windows and on rooftops can pick them off at will.

Early in the game, use Axemen with City Raider promotions to attack Archers in cities. Bring along at least a 2:1 ratio of attackers to defenders and you should be able to crack the city open. You may lose a unit or two, but capturing a city and weakening an opponent is usually worth it. If the city has a strong cultural defense, wait until you have Catapults. The game is supposed to be challenging, you know.

 

[Fiend777Fits]

Uh, no, sorry, this is not ridiculous, it's realistic: a smaller defensive force can withstand a much larger offensive one, especially on the right terrain. Just ask the Spartans. (I cannot wait until 300 hits theatres this spring!)

Furthermore, Horse Archers, like all mounted units in the game, suck at city raiding, and that's on purpose. Since the Warlords 2.08 patch, they actually have a -10% city attack demerit! Why, for the love of all that is holy, are you using them to attack cities?!? "Gee, when I beat my head against this wall, it hurts! Why is that?" Traditionally, mounted units operate better in open terrain, not in tight enclosed spaces like ancient city streets, where archers hiding behind windows and on rooftops can pick them off at will.

Early in the game, use Axemen with City Raider promotions to attack Archers in cities. Bring along at least a 2:1 ratio of attackers to defenders and you should be able to crack the city open. You may lose a unit or two, but capturing a city and weakening an opponent is usually worth it. If the city has a strong cultural defense, wait until you have Catapults. The game is supposed to be challenging, you know.

Well I should've expected that. I know horse archers are weak, but I was using it as an example. I play mostly mods, so I find it hard to relate the units I'm using to attack. Needless to say most all of them are 4 strength with city raider promotions if possible. The archer's strength never changes (as it is strong enough).

I concede, anyway. I'm not gonna argue over the validity of archers. All I really wanted was some helpful strategies. But everyone here is more interested in bashing you, so forget it.

On a side note:

There coming out with a movie based on the Battle of Thermopylae? Freakin awesome! Any idea who's playing in it?

EDIT: Just watched the preview. Argh. Not Colin Farrell again. Other than that, looks awesome. They're even using NIN in the soundtrack.

 

[FoxTrot12]

Actually, I'm pretty sure 6 horse archers could take 2 archers on a hill. There'd only be 1 or 2 left, but I think they could manage. It depends on promotions and other factors.

 

[Turner]

Moderator Action: kristopherb - warned for flaming.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Regulas021]

The best way to deal with a group of archers is to just starve the city. That's your only hope, especially if they have protective as a trait.

 

[strollen]

Well I should've expected that. I know horse archers are weak, but I was using it as an example. I play mostly mods, so I find it hard to relate the units I'm using to attack. Needless to say most all of them are 4 strength with city raider promotions if possible. The archer's strength never changes (as it is strong enough).

I concede, anyway. I'm not gonna argue over the validity of archers. All I really wanted was some helpful strategies. But everyone here is more interested in bashing you, so forget it.

Assuming you have iron, swordsman with an axeman or two thrown in are pretty good at taking out archers in the early game ,especially with city raider (CR3) promotions. Now admitly archers in city on a hill are particularly good at defending. What I did the last time I faced the problem is to attack cities (and barb cities) on grasslands with swordsman, until I had a couple swordsman with CR3. Even archers with a Garrison2 promotions in hills are at a disadvantage compared to swordsman with CR3.

If you don't have iron, than you basically have to wait until catpults before taking out the city.

 

[Sisiutil]

Well I should've expected that. I know horse archers are weak, but I was using it as an example. I play mostly mods, so I find it hard to relate the units I'm using to attack. Needless to say most all of them are 4 strength with city raider promotions if possible. The archer's strength never changes (as it is strong enough).

I concede, anyway. I'm not gonna argue over the validity of archers. All I really wanted was some helpful strategies. But everyone here is more interested in bashing you, so forget it.

On a side note:

There coming out with a movie based on the Battle of Thermopylae? Freakin awesome! Any idea who's playing in it?

EDIT: Just watched the preview. Argh. Not Colin Farrell again. Other than that, looks awesome. They're even using NIN in the soundtrack.

I apologize if that came across as bashing rather than as a little good-spirited teasing. That wasn't my intent. As for strategies, like I said, a 2:1 ratio (or better) of City Raider-promoted Axemen should do the trick. It does for me. See if you can get them to CRII against some barbarians first.

OFF TOPIC: Colin Farrell's not going to be in 300. The lead actor's name is Gerard Butler--he does bear a passing resemblance, I guess. Here's the IMDB page: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0416449/. Is that indeed Nine Inch Nails they're playing in the trailer? Which tune?

 

[Fiend777Fits]

OFF TOPIC: Colin Farrell's not going to be in 300. The lead actor's name is Gerard Butler--he does bear a passing resemblance, I guess. Here's the IMDB page: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0416449/. Is that indeed Nine Inch Nails they're playing in the trailer? Which tune?

No, not King Leonidas. I'm talking bout the guy who says "...then we will fight in the shade" in the trailer. I thought that guy was Colin Farrell. The song they're playing is called "Just Like You Imagined" off of The Fragile (1999).