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

[Still_Asleep]

Maces are better than Knights, because they will perform very similar vs Longbows in cities but are cheaper. And they have decent chances against their counter, the crossbowman, too. Knights on the other hand have problems with pikemen and elephants.

What you really need is enough siege (catas or trebuchets) to soften the defenders up, enough macemen to take them down, and a few complementary units to protect the stack from opponents knights/crossbows/elephants so the opponent cannot take your stack out on his turn.

 

[Tristan_C]

A suicide drill1 treb gives the best chances of doing some damage to the defender it is matched against--usually the strongest one in the city. Far better, IMO, than sacrificing a CR3 mace against it.

CR3 units have the weird situation of being too valuable to take the risks you'd want them to take; I try not to deploy them below 80 odds if I can help it and will sacrifice green siege units instead. I am wondering if this is wrong, though...

 

[TheMeInTeam]

A suicide drill1 treb gives the best chances of doing some damage to the defender it is matched against--usually the strongest one in the city. Far better, IMO, than sacrificing a CR3 mace against it.

CR3 units have the weird situation of being too valuable to take the risks you'd want them to take; I try not to deploy them below 80 odds if I can help it and will sacrifice green siege units instead. I am wondering if this is wrong, though...

A knight is 10 more than a treb and has a better chance of guaranteed damage via ignored first strikes.

 

[Tristan_C]

I didn't think of that! However, the lack of collateral is sadface. I know I said the best chance, but maybe I should have said it was the best deal. Do you suicide knights against a city? (Only if there are sieges in the garrison maybe?)

 

[Gary King]

If I have a huge stack of Knights, then it's not always suicide as they have a withdrawal chance, etc. and I can often get away with only losing one or two of them against a city, without bombardment or collateral.

 

[Yxklyx]

If I have a huge stack of Knights, then it's not always suicide as they have a withdrawal chance, etc. and I can often get away with only losing one or two of them against a city, without bombardment or collateral.

Are you taking Flanking when promoting them then? In my last game (as Vikings) I was taking Combat and sent them out against Longbows and they did well - I would use one Trebuchet for collateral.

 

[Harvin87]

I've always thought that there is something unbalanced ... you need too many artillery to conquer a city.

 

[Kierkegaard]

Use siege weapons followed by other units and u'll take any city

 

[Malchar]

You can give knights more promotions than any other unit if you build stables.

 

[Gary King]

Yeah, with stables, Knights are great. I don't use Flanking; I usually just go Combat II. And with Great Generals, create a Medic III.

 

[EsaKo]

Medic III for explorer is an interesting and working combination, but the bad part is that few people want to waste a GG into a unit that'll never be good at combat. I seldom use medic III though, I usually manage with that medic II explorer.

 

[Gary King]

Medic III for explorer is an interesting and working combination, but the bad part is that few people want to waste a GG into a unit that'll never be good at combat. I seldom use medic III though, I usually manage with that medic II explorer.

Who said make a Explorer Medic III? I make a Knight (or later, Cavalry) a Medic III. However, I'll avoid using the unit in combat when possible as it's more useful alive to me. A single Medic III unit in a huge stack can the entire thing up in very little time.

 

[EsaKo]

Who said make a Explorer Medic III? I make a Knight (or later, Cavalry) a Medic III. However, I'll avoid using the unit in combat when possible as it's more useful alive to me. A single Medic III unit in a huge stack can the entire thing up in very little time.

I said. They're about the best possible medic unit there is, the only bad thing is that they can't get Woodsman III.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I didn't think of that! However, the lack of collateral is sadface. I know I said the best chance, but maybe I should have said it was the best deal. Do you suicide knights against a city? (Only if there are sieges in the garrison maybe?)

Unfortunately, medieval units are pretty situational on high levels. I rarely use either.

If the city had a lot of units I'd be more inclined to use siege, while if it had a small # of tough defenders (like 1-3) I might consider knights for that role.

 

[kivanc]

I didn't think of that! However, the lack of collateral is sadface. I know I said the best chance, but maybe I should have said it was the best deal. Do you suicide knights against a city? (Only if there are sieges in the garrison maybe?)

sure, you can suicide every type of unit. just try not to lose your high xp units, the rest can be replaced anyway.

an example on my way of attacking a city: (odd numbers are random just to tell and stack attack isn't included, i'm just trying to tell sth)
enemy city has 2longbows w/o promos, i attack with 2 maces (Joe, Jack) and 2axes (William,Avarel)

1) Joe: combat5, 95% odds
Jack:combat4, 85% odds
William: city raider2, 50%odds
Avarel: city raider2, 50%odds

i attack with Joe&Jack. There isn't much risk for them and i prefer them to get xp from war.

2) Joe: combat5, a little hurt, 75% odds
Jack: combat4, a little hurt, 65% odds
William: city raider2, 50%odds
Avarel: city raider2, 50%odds

i attack with william&Avarel. i don't risk high level Joe and Jack. If low xp axes die, Joe&Jack will more easily finish the hurt longbowman and take the city. and they will get the xp.

3) Joe: combat5, a little hurt, 75% odds
Jack:combat4, a little hurt, 65% odds
William:city raider2, a little hurt, 15%odds
Avarel:city raider2, a little hurt, 15%odds

there is no meaning to attack with William/Avarel first. Most probably they will die w/o hurting the longbowman a little. i don't risk any unit. i retreat outside city borders and come back to attack after healing.

but if i believe i have to attack now so as not to let him draft more, i attack with Jack first.
a) If Jack dies, i retreat and to postpone the attack. I come back later with more units. I cannot risk level5 Joe.
b) if Jack kills 1of the longbowman then i attack the last longbowman with axes William and Avarel.
b1)If they can hurt the last longbowman even a little, the odds of Joe will increase. And lastly I will attack with Joe.
b2) If they cannot hurt the last longbowman and the odds of Joe is still ~70/75, i retreat and come back later.

 

[EsaKo]

enemy city has 2longbows w/o promos, i attack with 2 maces (Joe, Jack) and 2axes (William,Avarel)

I was getting fed with Alice and Bob anyway

 

[Tristan_C]

Who said make a Explorer Medic III? I make a Knight (or later, Cavalry) a Medic III. However, I'll avoid using the unit in combat when possible as it's more useful alive to me. A single Medic III unit in a huge stack can the entire thing up in very little time.

Because an explorer will pretty much never end up defending a stack, whereas AIs will pretty much throw the book at a stack where they have odds on killing a prominent unit GG

 

[EsaKo]

Because an explorer will pretty much never end up defending a stack, whereas AIs will pretty much throw the book at a stack where they have odds on killing a prominent unit GG

Exactly. And who wants to waste an expensive unit that could be used for combat as a medic? Explorers are cheap to use and replace (provided they somehow manage to die). The speed is also a bonus.

 

[kivanc]

Who said make a Explorer Medic III? I make a Knight (or later, Cavalry) a Medic III. However, I'll avoid using the unit in combat when possible as it's more useful alive to me. A single Medic III unit in a huge stack can the entire thing up in very little time.

About explorer-mounted unit comparison for medic3, both can be preferred.

a mounted unit is more advantageous on means of gaining new xps.
an explorer cannot attack so it is less likely to gain level except early game against barbs.

however there are some cases that you attack a hurt archer and get odds of 90%. so you just attack with your medic mounted unit and let him gain new xps. this way, you can give your medic a new useful promo. promotions which could have good synergy with medic3 might be mobility, commando, morale etc.
your healer would move from one stack with full-energy to another stach who has hurt maces.

 

[EsaKo]

a mounted unit is more advantageous on means of gaining new xps.

I don't know why a medic unit should need more promotions, although utility promotions that would be a waste for combat units (sentry for example) could be useful. I still prefer explorers. Their major drawback is that they have to receive the exp at training point, since they won't get new exp anywhere.