Plumed archer or arbelest

[Bob The Bo]

I want to try Mayans cos I think they are my favourite doc but idk which to choose arbelest or plumed archers

Arbelest are cheaper but plumed archers have more health tbh I’d rather use arbelest because they can be made at an archery range

[nooxet]

Plumed archer is a faster walking and shooting unit and is better than arbs. But still you can test both units and use what you think suits you better.

[sdjsdooiweur]

Plumed, they have weird hidden bonus vs everything.

[TriRem]

Originally posted by sdjsdooiweur:

Plumed, they have weird hidden bonus vs everything.

+2 vs infantry and +2 vs spearmen, that's all.

[conqueror060]

I agree that plumed archer is more useful in combat and a stronger unit, but the arbalest bonus vs buildings and better range is something very important. I believe they are equal.

[Fanta Morgana]

I guess if we compare Arbalest, we are comparing it with the Elite Plumed archer, which has the same range. Arbalest does more damage, especially against buildings.
I personally would go with Plumed. It is way more resistant and due to its speed is able to avoid infavorable battles. Its pretty much functions as a cavalry archer at a cost slightly above a regular archer. They can survive an Onager hit, which is one of the most dangerous counters to Mass Archers.

[NIKFS]

I know i could try that myself tomorrow but do you mean onager or siege onager hit?

[Fanta Morgana]

Originally posted by NIK_F_S:

I know i could try that myself tomorrow but do you mean onager or siege onager hit?

direct siege onager hit even kills the plummed archer. However a lot of civs don't have the siege onager and even if they have, they probably only upgrade to it very late as its a very costly upgrade

[Lord Commander]

I prefer plumes, the higher move speed makes everything easier.

[[T.R.] James]

plumes. They have bonus vs infantry and more speed