Are all the HMA units besides archers useless?

[DeletedUser]

I'm in the high middle age and longbow archers ive discovered are more efficient at dealing with enemy forces regardless of what the composition I'm facing is. They one shot cannons and get an attack bonus on rocks. All I have to do is huddle them and wait for the computer to attack and then I counterattack and win. I've built some other military buildings but I feel like I wasted some resources on them. I wanted to incorporate a mixed army but the leaderboards are dominated by people who only build longbow archers. There's no amount of strategy available in the game to overcome the massive differences in unit strength.

Does anyone else have a problem with how overpowered ranged units are in this game? Its just a lot less challenging and competitive than I wanted using my army to be.

 

[DeletedUser]

Hey hellanicus.
I'm still barely entering HMA and I find myself realizing the same thing and planning to only go for crossbowmen simply because the other units appear to be either too slow or too fragile to be of relative use, even more so when going up in ages. So I agree that ranged units are overpowered and in my personal opinion, the best solution is for the team to tweak some stuff in the speed/movement section of the other units. I see your point that combat should be way more challenging. It should require building a strategy that utilizes different kinds of units, as the whole HoMM-type turn-based combat is all about.
I understand it is still beta and things are being worked on and tweaked constantly, but the thing that I think is horrible in its very core is the AI. I tried putting an archer in full range of the enemy unit and when I clicked auto-combat, to my utter amazement, it didn't shoot! Also happens with AI's long-range units. They simply don't bother even firing when in range in a few cases.

 

[DeletedUser]

Hey Guys
i just read your post and i think the thread i raised before reading yours is a similar issue to some of the points you have both raised, my attacking army did not attack until i had lost 4 units and moved all 8 which kind of renders the notion of Attack as some what useless unless there is a built in Defense advantage, maybe you will both read my thread and comment ... thanks

 

[DeletedUser]

I'm in the high middle age and longbow archers ive discovered are more efficient at dealing with enemy forces regardless of what the composition I'm facing is. They one shot cannons and get an attack bonus on rocks. All I have to do is huddle them and wait for the computer to attack and then I counterattack and win. I've built some other military buildings but I feel like I wasted some resources on them. I wanted to incorporate a mixed army but the leaderboards are dominated by people who only build longbow archers. There's no amount of strategy available in the game to overcome the massive differences in unit strength.

Does anyone else have a problem with how overpowered ranged units are in this game? Its just a lot less challenging and competitive than I wanted using my army to be.

I have never had any cannon be one shoot by longbows. On another note i find heavy knights more difficult to combat (beat) than longbows and strongly disagree with the above opinion. If I want clean wins then I use bonus units against enemy army. Melee against horses, archers against heavy units and long range against archers and long range.

Yes, you can win almost every battle with longbows but you have more casualties than when using appropriate units.

 

[DeletedUser]

You say that but I have no idea how that can be true. Let me ask you this first, have you ever tried the strategy I outlined using only archers and not attacking? Because heavy cavalry are my favorite units as well and I built them to counter an all archer player and they couldn't beat the all archer composition no matter what I did. I was using nothing but hard counters and they couldn't beat an only archer force. So if your making it work I would really like to know how because I can't and apparently neither can most players if their buildings are any tell.

stefanceltare said he uses long range - not cavalry - against archers & long range.

Btw, could the 'HMA' in the subject heading of this thread please be changed to 'LMA'? A minor point, I know, but it's been bugging me :p

 

[DeletedUser]

lol okay, let's go over what he wrote...

He finds Heavy Knights more difficult to beat, i.e. go up against.

He uses melee against horses, archers against heavy units, and long range against archers and long range.

I don't see him claiming to use cavalry units anywhere in his post, so how is he misrepresenting himself?

 

[DeletedUser]

I misunderstood what he said because I thought he was disagreeing with me in a rational manner. Now that I do understand it I realize he was saying nothing of significance. He disagrees which unit is most difficult to fight, which is irrelevant to the topic and then he told me what units he uses in combat and misrepresented that. I thought he was saying more than he really was. I really shouldn't have responded at all, there isn't anything to respond to. He also misunderstood something I said.

He blindly asserted his opinion saying he strongly disagrees with me and offered nothing of an explanation why. So yeah I did not understand him clearly, glad you could find that amusing. But he disagrees with me simply because he does based on nothing, while using the same ranged strategy I do and yet somehow finding fault with it.

So yes haha I'm so dumb how could I possibly not instantly grasp that sentiment.

 

[DeletedUser]

Hellanicus, I think my answer was right on topic and clear response to your post. You said all other units are useless, besides archers. I explained why I do not agree. Every unit has it's purpose, more or less, even with the current dumb AI. You even said archers are overpowered and that is why I gave you the "horses" example. Take my example: you have 8 longbows against 8 heavy knights. You have a very good chance of winning but also a very good chance of losing and IF you win then for sure you have lots of casualties. On the other hand if you take 8 longswords you have better chance of winning that same battle with less dead units. It all depends on whether you care about your dead units or not.

Your longbows only "look" overpowered because of the dumb AI.

You use the same ranged strategy as I do? Are you saying that long range units are overpowered too?

If you want that challenge you were mentioning in your first post, then may I suggest to try and win the battles with 0 casualties like I do...

 

[DeletedUser]

"You said all other units are useless, besides archers."

Technically I asked, but either way that is what is called an expression. I do understand the other units have purpose and can be used. If you need to reassure yourself that I do please refrain.


"Take my example: You have a very good chance of winning but also a very good chance of losing and IF you win then for sure you have lots of casualties. On the other hand if you take 8 longswords you have better chance of winning that same battle with less dead units. It all depends on whether you care about your dead units or not."

Your example is not an example it is a hypothetical since no one defends their empire with all cavalry, and second its also false. I have won several battles with all archers against mostly cavalry and I did not lose any archers in some and few in others. I maneuver them around rocks make sure to keep out of cavalry range and make the correct targeting decisions. When I see cavalry I grin because it means a cheap and easy win for me. and it has consistently every time I deploy my archers. Maybe your just not as good a player as me so you cant relate and make my strategy work. Many other players experiences mirror mine, you offer nothing but blind disagreement based on nothing but opinion. That is not compelling and it comes off bad.


"Your longbows only "look" overpowered because of the dumb AI."

No. They ARE overpowered because of the AI, and map design, and unit stats and terrain bonuses and probably many things that slip my mind.


"You use the same ranged strategy as I do? Are you saying that long range units are overpowered too?"

I don't use them so I won't venture a comment, unlike other people who freely comment in ignorance, but using archers and artillery exploits many of the same strategies and I don't see a distinction worth mentioning between the two.

 

[DeletedUser]

I get the picture now. You have no idea what forums are for... Let me help ya. You come on the forums and "technically" ask something, then I "technically" come and give an answer. You have an opinion about something, I disagree. It is as simple as that.

You say people do not defend with all in cavalry? My example was not hypothetical, was fact since I have neighbors that go with 8 horses. Maybe I am not as good as you are. Could be true, you know? Dunno then how I am NUMBER 1 in Arvahall with almost 200.000 points and almost 3900 battles.

Now who is ignorant and arrogant? You should play the game a bit more, finish all provinces and try various unit builds and maps before throwing posts here and there with that kind of attitude. If you can't accept difference of opinion then i friendly suggest that you should be the one to refrain from making this kind of posts.

 

[DeletedUser]

"I get the picture now. You have no idea what forums are for... Let me help ya. You come on the forums and "technically" ask something, then I "technically" come and give an answer. You have an opinion about something, I disagree. It is as simple as that."

Well actually I have an experience and you have an opinion.

"You say people do not defend with all in cavalry? My example was not hypothetical, was fact since I have neighbors that go with 8 horses. Maybe I am not as good as you are. Could be true, you know? Dunno then how I am NUMBER 1 in Arvahall with almost 200.000 points and almost 3900 battles."

And I'm sure you worked very hard for your money but being number 1 on ranking does not mean you have the best combat skill or city planning it merely means you have managed to accumulate the most points. You know I can look at your city right, see how efficient it is how good you actually are. There are many people ranked lower who I know for certain are better at managing their cities than you, but you have more points than them what am I saying.

"Now who is ignorant and arrogant?"

You, for thinking you can come in to peoples topics tell them they're wrong based on your whims and then trying to use your rank points to imply you know better than everyone else. You do not.

"You should play the game a bit more,"

I will

"finish all provinces and try various unit builds and maps before throwing posts here and there with that kind of attitude."

I already have all the provinces and have tried all the units, well except the cannon. Maybe your the one who should tone down your pretension thinking you know whats best because your ranked #1 and still build archers in HMA.


"If you can't accept difference of opinion then i friendly suggest that you should be the one to refrain from making this kind of posts."

I am perfectly accepting of your opinion and I accept it in its entirety and given evidence I would be willing to admit I was wrong and move on without issue. I just know that its baseless and I'm not going to show it respect just because of your rank and that you disagree, because that is the only argument you have made, that I am wrong. I don't care if you think I'm wrong, no one but you does. I care about input, feedback, criticism, discussion. You gave me condescension, declarations, and not much else. I've wasted more time in this conversation than I should have. Respond however you wish this is my last post in this topic

 

[DeletedUser]

Indeed, you did waste more time than you should... Your topic is a question, by definition YOU do not know the answer. Otherwise you wouldn't start the topic. Since it is a free forum, I can come in any topic and give MY opinion, which I did in a friendly manner, unlike you. I didn't give you any condescension or whatever. In fact your posts are sarcastic, ironic. Maybe you need to refresh your mind and re-read my first post. I gave you my evidence and example, real example and not some hypothetical one as you seem to think.

It's called LMA, as in Late Middle Age and yes, I still build archers... so I can win the Iron Age tower along with ALL others. I don't have to use my "rank points", as my city, number of battles and medals speak for themselves. There are better players at organizing their city more efficient, you say? There may very well be... I never said I was the best at that. I only meant that I have some experience and know what I am talking about.

If you cared so much about input, feedback and the rest then you would take my post as it is, wrong or right. You don't have to respect me for my rank, you should respect the fact that I posted in a friendly manner, unlike you. I think that says everything.

Anyway, this is going offtopic and wouldn't want to derail a thread. Since you do want feedback and arguments, I suggest you do respond to the next poster.

Cheers!

 

[DeletedUser]

* eating popcorn viciously*

DD

 

[DeletedUser1032]

* Stealing some popcorn from DD in order to enjoy the show and get fed at the same time. *

You guys are arguing semantics. You both are big players, and you both have good strategies and/or tactics, otherwise you wouldn't get that big. Archers are awesome, since they follow Einstein's principle of "spooky action at a distance", meaning they can weaken or kill from long range. Horses are awesome because they're quick, so they can close in with archers really quick, get rid of archer's "spooky action at a distance" advantage, and pound them into oblivion. Archers are awesome because they are relatively quick on marshland, where other units suck, so they can use that to give them that sinking feeling while shooting them to pieces. Long range units are awesome because they can overcome that and pound the archers in the marsh while enjoying the dry fields and bring the "spooky action at a distance" to the archers who are now stuck in the bog.

Point is that it's how you play the game. I give a crappy gamer best units, and he'll still loose. I give any of you two crappy units and you'll probably win, because you both know how to make the best use of what you got. Therefore, I'm not giving any units to either of you, otherwise I'll only get their dead corpses back.

 

[DeletedUser]

Thats very well said, TerraAnt. It all depends on how you use those units and the luck you have with the generated map.

@DemonDurai: I like popcorn too, May I have some? Don't want to plunder it from ya...

 

[DeletedUser1032]

* DD, Terra's coming to the rescue of your popcorn fields. Bringing archers and whatever else will do as temporary scarecrows. *

 

[DeletedUser]

When i have Cav, which is seldom, but when i have them i stick them in defence. Seems to work well.

 

[DeletedUser3157]

If I want clean wins then I use bonus units against enemy army. Melee against horses, archers against heavy units and long range against archers and long range.

This. Now I can't speak too detailed about the use of higher age troops(I just reached EMA after about 2 weeks of playing and 500 battles, EN5), but for their prequisits it seems very true. Againts a fight with 8 heavy cavalary I had bad time my first try with 8 slingers, but got a rather nice win when trying again with 4 soldiers 4 slingers. Once I learned to use slingers and then archers properly, no fight against slower melee units became a problem. And now when I finally built a ballista camp(my noob ass skipped building stone throwers) heavy archer armies are no longer troop costly to attack, hardly lose anything when attacking my iron age nabers and almost done with HMA on the map.