How to shoot into melee? (positioning archers)

[Sch]

Is there some kind of a rule of thumb that determines my archers ability whether they can shoot into melee from BEHIND my main line that is engaged in close combat?

I really dont know how does the game determine whether the archers are "obstructed" or they can just aim high and land shots onto the enemy.

Thank you,

[Sauske]

Escrito originalmente por Hellrazer - wvx:

Escrito originalmente por Superbia:

There is effective and there is cheesy. You can argue that the cheesiest strats are the most effective and there would be merit in that, but most people who are not complete tryhards would not really bother going for the optimal cheese setups unless they're dealing with overwhelming odds. And let's be honest, if you're dealing with overwhelming odds, you already failed on the campaign strategy map to begin with, so it's a skill issue anyway.

It's not really about cheese as it is about knowing what you can do, why the hell would I keep 3-4 spear/defensive units when I know that in 90% of the fights they won't get to hit even an enemy unit since I know how to make the enemy focus mostly on the frontline heroes that are at the limit of the ranged troops.

In the beginning (I have around 1500-2000 hrs played) I was also using a lot of melee units (50/50%) and then I reduced them little by little over time until I got to the conclusion that for the mid-late armies they are a weakness if you know how to play. with certain factions, especially if you enjoy building really strong defensive heroes.

I would personally not use characters only as frontline as that feels like cheese to me, since if I were playing against a player, they would never just blob their units around the characters and would just go for my ranged. People have wildly different notions of what cheese is.

[Chibbity]

Escrito originalmente por Sauske:

If you mean what I am thinking, that is in my experience more like "well, there is nothing better to do, let's do that and hope for the best" kind of approach. It often doesn't work at all, definitely isn't optimal, and you can only use it with archers/crossbowmen, not gunners like what is mostly discussed here.

The key words there were "simplest" and "no prior setup."

So yeah, it's a fallback strategy when you haven't done any setup; and you need something you can employ right this second. No, it doesn't work great compared to actually setting your army up correctly in the first place; but it's significantly better than just shooting over the frontlines heads directly.

Also, the OP was definitely asking about archers, so I don't know what you mean lol.

Escrito originalmente por Sch:

Is there some kind of a rule of thumb that determines my archers ability whether they can shoot into melee from BEHIND my main line that is engaged in close combat?

I really dont know how does the game determine whether the archers are "obstructed" or they can just aim high and land shots onto the enemy.

Thank you,

[Apollyon]

Escrito originalmente por Hellrazer - wvx:

It's not really about cheese as it is about knowing what you can do, why the hell would I keep 3-4 spear/defensive units when I know that in 90% of the fights they won't get to hit even an enemy unit since I know how to make the enemy focus mostly on the frontline heroes that are at the limit of the ranged troops.

In the beginning (I have around 1500-2000 hrs played) I was also using a lot of melee units (50/50%) and then I reduced them little by little over time until I got to the conclusion that for the mid-late armies they are a weakness if you know how to play. with certain factions, especially if you enjoy building really strong defensive heroes.

Because realistically, in order to make a full ranged army work, you would need to either corner camp so you can't get flanked or use some other super cheesy tactic like having single entity characters blob up the enemy infantry so your ranged troops can turn them into pincushions.

Escrito originalmente por Sauske:

I would personally not use characters only as frontline as that feels like cheese to me, since if I were playing against a player, they would never just blob their units around the characters and would just go for my ranged. People have wildly different notions of what cheese is.

Exactly. It's the epitome of cheese. It works, but it only works if you're willing to become a cheeselord, which I find both boring and anti-climactic in my campaigns. I leave that to Youtubers trying to show how to win battles against impossible odds. Legend is good for that, but if the goal is to have fun with minimal cheese, you're definitely going to have a melee frontline.

[Hellrazer - wvx]

Escrito originalmente por Sauske:

I would personally not use characters only as frontline as that feels like cheese to me, since if I were playing against a player, they would never just blob their units around the characters and would just go for my ranged. People have wildly different notions of what cheese is.

Usually the chars only take the attention of 25-35% from the enemy army (kinda like how much from the 20 slots they also occupy). there will always be units bypassing them.
From my PoV cheese is when you kill their entire army with a mage or am unkillable Vlad/Archaeon or a blob of mages or 100 other things. What I am using is the start of the long range combat vs mounted combat, use the environment against the enemy while you pick them off from a distance any way you could.
Also what difference is there in using as a front line the sisters instead of a line of spearmen when the sisters are better melee fighters compared to the spearmen when upgraded .... this is without considering the melee cheats that the AI gets.

[Hellrazer - wvx]

Escrito originalmente por Superbia:

Because realistically, in order to make a full ranged army work, you would need to either corner camp so you can't get flanked or use some other super cheesy tactic like having single entity characters blob up the enemy infantry so your ranged troops can turn them into pincushions.

Well, in my last empire and dwarf campaigns I used just a minimal number of mele units and managed to win 90% of the fight I took without corner camping while also securing my flanks by having strong artillery or anti-cavalry units there and focusing on said units when they came into range by changing the firing arcs. I also got wrecked when there were no spots with good LoS or where the forests were too close BUT most of the hard fights were not corner camping fights.
PS: For dwarves I usually still keep 2 longbeards/def units and 1-2 slayer units for protecting the flanks and getting rid of flying units that are too fast or if there are too many cavalry units.

[Apollyon]

Escrito originalmente por Hellrazer - wvx:

Well, in my last empire and dwarf campaigns I used just a minimal number of mele units and managed to win 90% of the fight I took without corner camping while also securing my flanks by having strong artillery or anti-cavalry units there and focusing on said units when they came into range by changing the firing arcs. I also got wrecked when there were no spots with good LoS or where the forests were too close BUT most of the hard fights were not corner camping fights.
PS: For dwarves I usually still keep 2 longbeards/def units and 1-2 slayer units for protecting the flanks and getting rid of flying units that are too fast or if there are too many cavalry units.

My guy, Dwarves have 80 armor on Quarrelers and Thunderers + 35% shield block, they're not comparable to other races. I can't speak to Dwarves or Empire since I only play High Elves, Dark Elves and Slaanesh atm, but Dwarf ranged troops have more armor than Silverin Guard and only 20 less armor than Phoenix Guard, so I can see why a melee frontline wouldn't be mandatory on them.

[Hellrazer - wvx]

Escrito originalmente por Superbia:

My guy, Dwarves have 80 armor on Quarrelers and Thunderers + 35% shield block, they're not comparable to other races. I can't speak to Dwarves or Empire since I only play High Elves, Dark Elves and Slaanesh atm, but Dwarf ranged troops have more armor than Silverin Guard and only 20 less armor than Phoenix Guard, so I can see why a melee frontline wouldn't be mandatory on them.

The sisters with upgrades have around 55 armor I think and a lot of melee defense, they are meant to stand in the front line and fight it out with normal infantry while the backlines clear them out, that is why the checkerboard is so good, the attackers wrap around and at the same time they are peppered with arrows from the sides and the back, making them crumble while at the same time impeding the next waves of mele in getting a perfect surface contact with the sisters in order to dead damage. Yes the sisters will crumble if elite infantry get into contact with them as a prolonged combat, but they do their job of resisting for a while.
The dwarves and both the new empire longrifles + the shorter range units have a lot more armor than the usual elf units but lower mele defense compared to the the sisters, so what the sisters lose in armor they gain in melee defense and health I think.

Those were the units I was talking about ... and the rats with their rattling guns and plague priests that summon masses of cannon fodder.

[Apollyon]

Escrito originalmente por Hellrazer - wvx:

The sisters with upgrades have around 55 armor I think and a lot of melee defense, they are meant to stand in the front line and fight it out with normal infantry while the backlines clear them out, that is why the checkerboard is so good, the attackers wrap around and at the same time they are peppered with arrows from the sides and the back, making them crumble while at the same time impeding the next waves of mele in getting a perfect surface contact with the sisters in order to dead damage. Yes the sisters will crumble if elite infantry get into contact with them as a prolonged combat, but they do their job of resisting for a while.
The dwarves and both the new empire longrifles + the shorter range units have a lot more armor than the usual elf units but lower mele defense compared to the the sisters, so what the sisters lose in armor they gain in melee defense and health I think.

Those were the units I was talking about ... and the rats with their rattling guns and plague priests that summon masses of cannon fodder.

You're only really making a case for a Sisters of Avelorn doomstack and doomstacks are cheesy in and of the themselves, so you really have no argument here.

[Cyiel]

Escrito originalmente por Superbia:

Escrito originalmente por BIG E.:

Checkerboard formation is actually really good for archers to do less friendly fire. It gives them diagonal line of sight next to your frontline.

This is not accurate. All checkerboard really does is ensure that when the enemy reaches your missile troops, it prevents all of them from being tied up in melee, thus ensuring some will keep shooting. It's a formation that's useful when your army is 80% or more missile troops, which you'll only really see with High Elves and Empire.

Also, checkerboard is really bad into artillery, so even then there are instances where you won't want to default to it.

cough Wood Elves cough

[Sauske]

Escrito originalmente por Chibbity:

Also, the OP was definitely asking about archers, so I don't know what you mean lol.

Oh yeah, I must have mixed it up with some other thread where gunpowder units were being discussed, my bad :P

[Sauske]

Escrito originalmente por Hellrazer - wvx:

Escrito originalmente por Sauske:

I would personally not use characters only as frontline as that feels like cheese to me, since if I were playing against a player, they would never just blob their units around the characters and would just go for my ranged. People have wildly different notions of what cheese is.

Usually the chars only take the attention of 25-35% from the enemy army (kinda like how much from the 20 slots they also occupy). there will always be units bypassing them.
From my PoV cheese is when you kill their entire army with a mage or am unkillable Vlad/Archaeon or a blob of mages or 100 other things. What I am using is the start of the long range combat vs mounted combat, use the environment against the enemy while you pick them off from a distance any way you could.
Also what difference is there in using as a front line the sisters instead of a line of spearmen when the sisters are better melee fighters compared to the spearmen when upgraded .... this is without considering the melee cheats that the AI gets.

I wouldn't really call using sisters only cheese, although I also probably wouldn't do that kind of stuff (which is highly ironic, since before getting into TW, I would have always used archer-only armies in every strategy game ever more or less). It just doesn't feel right to not have dedicated melee units (or hybrid units) for frontline. But fair enough, sisters are just good at melee as well as at archery, so even realistically, it sort of makes sense.

From what I have seen though, characters can very well stop any and all AI units from advancing, which I just find too cheesy. Way I look at things is, if an army/tactic could not realistically work against another player, I will not use it for the most part.

But soloing armies with Vlad or Archaon imo isn't cheese, it's not like you are doing that for maximum effectiveness or power, it is more like having fun and testing the limits of the characters to me. If the game says they can solo the army, why the hell not do it? They are super powerful in the lore as well. And it's not like having an army would be a hindrance to them anyway (for the most part; there are definitely exceptions).