You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Rome: Total War Discussion
Moderated by Terikel Grayhair, General Sajaru, Awesome Eagle

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.41 replies
Total War Heaven » Forums » Rome: Total War Discussion » All archer armies. A bad thing?
Bottom
Topic Subject:All archer armies. A bad thing?
« Previous Page  1 2  Next Page »
Ferret
Legionary
(id: The_Ferret)
posted 05 February 2005 14:56 EDT (US)         
Well, I don't think so, look at this, and look at the dead unit types, phalanxes, heavy infantry, light infantry, cavalry and even elephants. All using an all archer army. Anyone care to argue?


POSTER NUMBER ONE IN HOLY ROMAN PARTY XV
"Live forever, or die trying!"
TWH Baths Forumer of the Month - November 06
AuthorReplies:
androv
Legionary
posted 05 February 2005 23:38 EDT (US)     26 / 41       
I noticed that your opposing army was always the Carthaginians. They really suck when it comes to archers. They don't have any of their own, and are affected by arrows more so than any other faction i've tried. When I played as the Carth., I couldn't stand pharoh's archers, took too many lives.
Lord_Morningstar
Legionary
posted 05 February 2005 23:59 EDT (US)     27 / 41       

Quoted from Roman General:

An all archer army would beat an all cav army head on, but who starts the battle head on? Against a decent human player he will out flank you and crush you.

In my experience, even a medium difficulty AI will still try to flank you with cavalry.

Hikari
Legionary
(id: echowinds)
posted 06 February 2005 01:47 EDT (US)     28 / 41       
^Yes, but they come piecemeal a lot of times.

There's no way an all archer army can take a mass of heavy cavalry on the flanks. With a mass, they often would not even lose momentum, and the archers would kncoed apart like dominoes.


Lord_Morningstar
Legionary
posted 06 February 2005 04:18 EDT (US)     29 / 41       
I’m not exactly sure how all archer armies can beat all cav armies. I set up a custom battle; eight archer auxillia vs two companion cav, two Macedonian cav and four light lancers, all of them upgraded with the change from 10,000 Denarii. I arrayed the archers with each unit 2-3 ranks deep, in two lines curving slightly back at each end. Even on Medium, the cavalry simply charged forward and swept the archers from the field. They suffered some pretty severe losses (40-50%) but the archers were massacred in about a minute.
karoaper
Legionary
posted 06 February 2005 04:38 EDT (US)     30 / 41       
Remember that archers can't hit fast moving targets, like cavalry, very well.
Ferret
Legionary
(id: The_Ferret)
posted 06 February 2005 05:17 EDT (US)     31 / 41       
This was after patch 1.2 and the cavalry, granted, ripped apart the flanks, but as soon as they lost momentum, they soon became surrounded (reducing FF and making sure none escape) and became pin cushions.

The AI did use testudo (romans of course) and they were easily out-maneuvered on four sides (only protected on 3 ) and were destroyed, the few that reached the lines were outflanked for the above reason and were torn to shreds.

note: In both screenshots I took substantial losses but they of course took more.

The Carthaginians were only the test dummy in the screenshots, as they have a wider range of troops, L.I H.I Sp Cav Ele. Romans had the testudo but it seemed a waste of time screenshoting something that you couldn't see happening clearly any way.

Great debate goin on


POSTER NUMBER ONE IN HOLY ROMAN PARTY XV
"Live forever, or die trying!"
TWH Baths Forumer of the Month - November 06
sylvanllewelyn
Legionary
posted 06 February 2005 12:23 EDT (US)     32 / 41       
First of all forget the experience thing. Everyone had max experience, so there you go.

But this test might not be fair for a few reasons:

- no-one uses such high-denarii games. That's retarded.
- When you're setting up the army, you can see the number of troops. If you see the number increasing at a fast an uniform pace, you can take a hint that he's simply double-clicking. That means he's massing something.
- Romans cannot afford a whole army of infantry, as it's powerful but quite expansive. So at that stage you can take a hint that he's using a lot of archers already. At least he's using a lot of infantry if the numbers are high.

===>> I would use 5 units of heavy onagers to pound on them. I wouldn't know for sure that it was an archer army, but I do know by that point that I won't use a "balanced" army. Probably a 50-50 mix of elephants/cavalry, or cavalry/infantry.

Case 1: you are massing infantry. Then having lots of cavalry means you'll be flanked to death.

Case 2: you are massing archers. Then I will set all my light cav to loose formation and charge towards your archers, while my infantry charging slight behind. For best results, set phalanx formation off and loose formation. You rout my cavalry or elephants, my infantry will slaughter you.

The point is, if I make cavalry/elephants, then I WANT you to rout the elephants, because they don't do so much damange. They're only good for messing up infantry formations and cavalry. I need to deal damage, so if you focus fire the elephants, all the better, my cavalry will be intact when they crash into your archers.

Ferret
Legionary
(id: The_Ferret)
posted 06 February 2005 12:58 EDT (US)     33 / 41       
hmmm. Good point. I'll try that.

POSTER NUMBER ONE IN HOLY ROMAN PARTY XV
"Live forever, or die trying!"
TWH Baths Forumer of the Month - November 06
1ArCHeR1
Legionary
posted 06 February 2005 17:43 EDT (US)     34 / 41       
And if you stack all your cavalry on the sides of the map, depending on the map, the archers would only be able to use half the firepower they would normally be able to bring to bear without breaking formation, etc.

Also, if they keep formation, there would be plenty of friendly fire to boot...


"You can get a lot farther with a kind word and a gun, than you can with just a kind word." -The Coolest New Yorker (Robert DeNiro)
<A><R>
Crackaces
Legionary
posted 06 February 2005 18:11 EDT (US)     35 / 41       
There is one thing interesting about the intial post. Huge Unit sizes. This might seem like a small detail but especially with the new logic large missle/arrow units have certain advantages with huge unit sizes.

I noticed that using missles / arrows that they might miss the targeted unit but if there are lots of men to hit odds are that an arrow or missile will find a mark.

To set this up I used 3 units of Slingers and 2 units of Archers with 5 units of roman's finest backed up by 3 units of skirmishers. On the other side 10 units of Naked Fanatics. I had the archers and missles concentrate on the center enemy unit. What did not hit the center unit decimated the neighbors. Add 2 units of skirmishers behind the Hastatii and set the Hastatii to fire at will and the center enemy unit did not even make it to contact. The units on the sides took 25% hits. With the center empty I cleared out the inf on both sides.

Use small unit sizes and the Naked Fanitics in the center make contact and the units on the sides took 0%.

Crackaces

Roman General
Guest
posted 06 February 2005 20:04 EDT (US)     36 / 41       

Quote:

First of all forget the experience thing. Everyone had max experience, so there you go.

Experience doesn't really matter when you have 1,000 units more than they enemy *cough*first scrn shot*cough*


ΧΊ°”˜`”°ΊΧ
(―`·._.·[ ]·._.·΄―)
Oº°¨¨°ºO Roman General Oº°¨¨°ºO
––––•(-• •-)•––––
R.I.P. Kayla Renee Winterfeldt; born 28th of October 2004, died 28th of October 2004
In peace, sons bury thier fathers; in war, fathers bury thier sons. -- Herodotus
Ace Cataphract
HG Alumnus
(id: Ace_Cataphract)
posted 06 February 2005 20:40 EDT (US)     37 / 41       
"Numbers alone confer no advantage." It's not wise to argue with Sun Tzu.

I put a dollar in one of those change machines. Nothing changed. ~George Carlin
Roman General
Guest
posted 06 February 2005 20:51 EDT (US)     38 / 41       
in this case, im arguing with him.

It is a known fact that normal arrows are overall ineffective against elephants, but flamin arrows are the exact opposite. 3200-something units of Archers w/ flaming arrows will beat elephants anyday.


ΧΊ°”˜`”°ΊΧ
(―`·._.·[ ]·._.·΄―)
Oº°¨¨°ºO Roman General Oº°¨¨°ºO
––––•(-• •-)•––––
R.I.P. Kayla Renee Winterfeldt; born 28th of October 2004, died 28th of October 2004
In peace, sons bury thier fathers; in war, fathers bury thier sons. -- Herodotus
RTS_GamerGuy
Legionary
posted 06 February 2005 21:54 EDT (US)     39 / 41       
Oh sure. Just go right ahead and think that you're the only person ever to think of something like this.

BTW, I was RTW_GamerGuy at time of post.


Marvin: I ache therefore I am. Or, in my case, I am therefore I ache. Oh look, I appear to be lying in the bottom of a very deep hole. That seems a familiar concept, what does it remind me of? Ah, yes. Life. ~Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy Radio Show
Old Celt
Legionary
posted 07 February 2005 09:04 EDT (US)     40 / 41       
Onagers, wardogs and light cavalry will easily defeat all archer armies. I really think you are better off learning to use different units to advantage rather than relying on one unit, one tactic. How would your all archer army do on a RAINY DAY?
1ArCHeR1
Legionary
posted 07 February 2005 12:16 EDT (US)     41 / 41       
Experience makes a huge difference when it's archers v. infantry. Why? Because the archers use their experience waaay before the infantry does, or cavalry for that matter.

"You can get a lot farther with a kind word and a gun, than you can with just a kind word." -The Coolest New Yorker (Robert DeNiro)
<A><R>
« Previous Page  1 2  Next Page »
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Total War Heaven | HeavenGames