Archers

[Calvin the Cat]

Is this just me or do archers just suck? I've seen them fire like 20 volley's at an enemy unit and not deal a single loss, even brigands deal more damage than the most expensive archer that I've seen.

[Onihonker]

Archers were nerfed just before EA release.

[Calvin the Cat]

Originally posted by Onihonker:

Archers were nerfed just before EA release.

Do you know why? Considering how they are now a nerf wasn't exactly needed, I've seen them under perform in every situation. If anything they need to revert back to whatever it was originally.

[Hondo]

They were overpowering during testing so they were nerfed just before release. They will be adjusted in the very near future.

[Humble]

I guess archer will get more powerful in patch later than what we had now but less than before EA release. How much archer will be strong or power, is remain to seem, but I'm petty sure not same as powerful in EA Release. I do not know when patch with archer buff will coming.

[Issen]

Don't use archers for now. Theyre beeing worked on but currently no reason to use them.

[Squaul]

Originally posted by Calvin the Cat:

Is this just me or do archers just suck? I've seen them fire like 20 volley's at an enemy unit and not deal a single loss, even brigands deal more damage than the most expensive archer that I've seen.

"expensive archers" you mean the cheapest unit lmao ????

Also how did you used them exactly ? Context ?

Would be more usefull than an useless same copy pasta that hundreds did before you with more or less genuine intentions ...

[Squaul]

Originally posted by Calvin the Cat:

Originally posted by Onihonker:

Archers were nerfed just before EA release.

Do you know why? Considering how they are now a nerf wasn't exactly needed, I've seen them under perform in every situation. If anything they need to revert back to whatever it was originally.

He's reffering to the beta not the ea release

[Squaul]

obviously they will be stronger than now but still weaker than before that's simple.

[Humble]

Well, in long term Archers is expensive, due lot of ammo and replacement of bow, not only that but find skill people to do that too, I assumed melee fighter is most people could learn but archer is harder skill, now equipment starting out melee's might be expensive but in long term, Archer's thing is more expensive than melee foot soldier.

[Gibson]

yeah I had a mercenary unit of 36 archers shooting at 18 charging brigands and they didn't even kill anyone before they hit my front line..

[Calvin the Cat]

Originally posted by Squaul:

Originally posted by Calvin the Cat:

Is this just me or do archers just suck? I've seen them fire like 20 volley's at an enemy unit and not deal a single loss, even brigands deal more damage than the most expensive archer that I've seen.

"expensive archers" you mean the cheapest unit lmao ????

Also how did you used them exactly ? Context ?

Would be more usefull than an useless same copy pasta that hundreds did before you with more or less genuine intentions ...

As in the highest tier archer I have found so far, Heavy mercenary archers are the best I've seen, and the way I've used them is dependent on the situation, many times I have allowed them to volley from the front while enemy was charging, when the enemy was engaged in melee with my frontline I would flank around and move close, shoot the enemy in the side with independent fire which says "is better at closer ranges" and continue to pepper them with foam arrows apparently because they suck.

[Squaul]

Originally posted by Humble:

Well, in long term Archers is expensive, due lot of ammo and replacement of bow, not only that but find skill people to do that too, I assumed melee fighter is most people could learn but archer is harder skill, now equipment starting out melee's might be expensive but in long term, Archer's thing is more expensive than melee foot soldier.

not in the game yet tho ...

[Squaul]

Originally posted by Gibson:

yeah I had a mercenary unit of 36 archers shooting at 18 charging brigands and they didn't even kill anyone before they hit my front line..

tThat's basically the wrong way to use archers just saying . In this version at leats .

[Squaul]

Originally posted by Calvin the Cat:

Originally posted by Squaul:

"expensive archers" you mean the cheapest unit lmao ????

Also how did you used them exactly ? Context ?

Would be more usefull than an useless same copy pasta that hundreds did before you with more or less genuine intentions ...

As in the highest tier archer I have found so far, Heavy mercenary archers are the best I've seen, and the way I've used them is dependent on the situation, many times I have allowed them to volley from the front while enemy was charging, when the enemy was engaged in melee with my frontline I would flank around and move close, shoot the enemy in the side with independent fire which says "is better at closer ranges" and continue to pepper them with foam arrows apparently because they suck.

humm personnaly i didnt use merc yet but doing a run for that you should pay mercs you cant afford or archers merc if you have a budget has they of course are less usefull than melee.
(tho the archers merc the french one were the cheapest in price too so ... but they are just still archers tho im pretty sure their stats are also similar to militia like other merc etc...)

But if you have militia archers they arent expensive at all heck it's even the easiet unit to form up and bows are free money making too.

Now i guess you know to play the game and that you get as close as possible and to highest to lowest priority : go to the back , then flank and where they can have a line of sight .

When closer use the fire at will when far use default stance.

For me they work decently but they are support the big work is down by melee to hold ennemies and to shred finish them .
i have 2 archer 4 melee militia.

Also i meant against what units you were fighting ?
Like heavy armored troops or naked dudes ? That make a big difference.

Also from my experience shoot frontaly is useless shoot front only because it's the only "place" where you can shoot also the target being engaged in melee might change that a bit but shooting at the back is still best.


Just to be clear yes archers are underpowered but i think they are still usable more than what most people pretend im sure he will buff them a bit.

Also im a bit confused by your "tier" i see no tier in this game only soldiers with better equipement access and yet archer only have access to armors so you can make them just more tanky they also technically dont have melee ... yet just by armor ennemies archer seem to hold agaisnt some militia

[Squaul]

Originally posted by Calvin the Cat:

Is this just me or do archers just suck? I've seen them fire like 20 volley's at an enemy unit and not deal a single loss, even brigands deal more damage than the most expensive archer that I've seen.

tldr yeah melee are stronger but archer can still be used and have a small impact so you need to play really good or to go full melee or just have one unit of archers or two instead of 6 ya know.