What is the best unit to attack cities protected with Longbowmen?

[Cusanus]

Before nukes, the best units to attack any city are lots and lots of siege weapons.
(MG's not included...)

Just mix them with anything roughly contemporary at about a 2:1 ratio, 2 being the siege.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Any 12 str unit owns the hell out of them if the defenses are gone. Spies + cuirassers (or better cavalry), spies + rifles, and cannons are notable tech-lead examples that kill droves of longbows with little trouble.

At parity (IE full medieval war), you probably want to use CR maces or CR trebs. A CR mace should do pretty well even after minimal catapult collateral.

The good thing about muskets is that they can be drafted, so if you have a globe city there isn't much harm. Oromos and janissaries are very respectable too, as they add incredible oomph.

 

[K.K.]

Wow, necrobumping exactly 4 years after the last post We now have trebs to deal with difficult LBs.

 

[kivanc]

Wow, necrobumping exactly 4 years after the last post We now have trebs to deal with difficult LBs.

yeah


Feb 10, 2006, 11:17 PM #18
salty

Feb 10, 2010, 11:02 AM #19
camarilla

i don't remember how i found this thread. i didn't notice the year was 2006 and thought that the post was sent today.

 

[mariogreymist]

I have a theory regarding internet forum psychology: the same people who complain about bumping old threads are the same ones who snidely tell you to use the search feature when you ask a common question.

 

[FriendoftheDork]

i have a theory regarding internet forum psychology: The same people who complain about bumping old threads are the same ones who snidely tell you to use the search feature when you ask a common question.

qft

 

[markiz2001]

some suicide catapults followed by swords/axes/maces will do

best answear so far.

 

[Gary King]

Nice, one of my four-year-old threads. Since then, I've learned that I can simply just bumrush the AI with tons of Cavalry and no Siege. I learned this from TMIT of course It's been working great so far. Maybe I should give Espionage a go one day, though, to cut down on defenses first.

 

[vicawoo]

I have a theory regarding internet forum psychology: the same people who complain about bumping old threads are the same ones who snidely tell you to use the search feature when you ask a common question.

This forum's inactive enough that bumping old threads seems a lot funnier than it is annoying.

I don't pull the snide "use the search" comments, because I've learned over the years how useless it is. But it would be nice to see more original, groundbreaking content. Otherwise, I'm going to hold a poll to guess how many best leader threads there will be in the next month.

 

[K.K.]

I have a theory regarding internet forum psychology: the same people who complain about bumping old threads are the same ones who snidely tell you to use the search feature when you ask a common question.

I'm not complaining, are you?

 

[Axios]

best answear so far.

Or barrage Catapult + elephants

 

[CivMcNut]

Knights get my vote for best at taking out longbowmen, they seem to hold up better than any other same era unit with their immunity to first strikes and high base attack.

I would say that if you have an army of axes & swords and/or horse archers, you had better bring some extra suicide catapults to the party, cause a longbowman, especially on a hill, in a city, will eat their lunch if he is not softened up.

Many times an AI switching over to longbowmen from archers can mean the end of early hopes of conquest/domination if you lack middle age techs and don't have a big army.

 

[brothatactics]

trebs plus anything else really can beat longbows consistently in that era

 

[Sadadar]

In pretty much every era, where I don't have a large tech advantage, I find myself heavily using siege (often as sacrifice) and almost never have other units. In fact, I rarely go to war without either a tech or resource advantage without siege. I never successfully war in the time before cats (new monarch player).

That being said, I wonder if that has an effect on war wariness and other aspects to the game? I would never even consider attacking a longbow defended city, even with just one or two, without sieging down the cultural defenses and getting a better than 50% chance to win with my normal units. Is this not the right strategy? Should I just use siege to take down cultural defenses and then spam units to do the collateral damage and use a lot less siege?

 

[mariogreymist]

In pretty much every era, where I don't have a large tech advantage, I find myself heavily using siege (often as sacrifice) and almost never have other units. In fact, I rarely go to war without either a tech or resource advantage without siege. I never successfully war in the time before cats (new monarch player).

That being said, I wonder if that has an effect on war wariness and other aspects to the game? I would never even consider attacking a longbow defended city, even with just one or two, without sieging down the cultural defenses and getting a better than 50% chance to win with my normal units. Is this not the right strategy? Should I just use siege to take down cultural defenses and then spam units to do the collateral damage and use a lot less siege?

Every situation is different. I've won with Ragnar using essentially no siege vs primarily LB defenders by using espionage to reduce defenses, then promoting CR1/Cover. I do this with him because getting Berserkers early is key, meaning a fully developed economy. Once the warring begins, I need something to do with that commerce, and espionage is an excellent way to use it. I use cats only as collateral and only vs LBs on hilled cities...everywhere else, cover promoted Berserkers will take LBs in an efficient manner.

And as has been said, espionage + flanking ponies is a viable alternative to siege in most eras.

 

[fenrus]

Bombarding is optional, if you have the time. If they have Walls + Castles, it is not an option because you'll be bombarding till the end of time.

It's more effective to give your Cats/Trebs as many City Raider promotions and suicide with them then clean up whatever you got.

 

[gunkulator]

Bombarding is optional, if you have the time. If they have Walls + Castles, it is not an option because you'll be bombarding till the end of time.

It's more effective to give your Cats/Trebs as many City Raider promotions and suicide with them then clean up whatever you got.

If you're going up against a Protective Civ, those longbows are very tough to beat. There's a good chance they'll have walls and castles too. If you're having a hard time beating those longbows my advice is: Don't attack their cities. Pillage all around them. This takes far fewer units, gains you gold, doesn't rack up war weariness, let's you keep your science rate high and you don't have to deal with extra maintenance for a badly placed AI city. A pillaged AI civ generally doesn't recover well and eventually you'll out tech them.

 

[mechaerik]

Spies and Cuirassiers/Cavalry.

That'll crush the longbows.

 

[EsaKo]

War elephants are very effective in many situations provided your enemy hasn't got spears stacked everywhere. Seriously, a strength 8 unit available at construction. It also protects your catapults from horse archers and such with its added bonus. Possibly the best grunt unit for charging at cities at its era, and remains in a top position until macemen and musketmen are widespread. Not to mention pikes.

 

[Trev]

Definitely soften up with siege or flamking 2 knights, because their survival rates are good. Then use maces with CR, after a few cities you will have CR3 maces and after some more cities CR3 with cover. BY now softening up is not needed.