28-01-2003 02:11									#1
	Why is Medieval Infantry 4.2.1 and Longbowmen 4.1.1? Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Is there any reasoning behind the fact that Medieval Infantry are 4.2.1 and Longbows are 4.1.1? Not only does the longbow come later, but it's also the same price. What's with this?

	28-01-2003 02:25									#2
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Longbowmen don't require Iron, which is why they are slightly less effective for the same shield cost.

	28-01-2003 05:05									#3
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Long bowmen are 6-1-1

	28-01-2003 05:18									#4
	Get a bigger avatar today!

DuncanK, I'm not sure what mod you are playing, but in the standard game they are 4-1-1.

	28-01-2003 10:50									#5
	even worse is Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Guerillas at 6.6.1, and with iron--infantry at 6.10.1 available the same time, both costing 90 shields.

	28-01-2003 12:07									#6
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Infantry with melee weapons tend to be somewhat more effective in combat than specialised ranged weapons users. The problem is that at the scale the bows do not really deserve bombardment.

And the designers wanted it that way.

	28-01-2003 12:13									#7
	Re: even worse is Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by HolyWarrior Guerillas at 6.6.1, and with iron--infantry at 6.10.1 available the same time, both costing 90 shields.

Guerillas require no resource. Infantry require rubber.

You would rather have no 6 attack foot sloggers if you are without rubber? Oh, and they cost 10 more than Riflemen. Your point?

	28-01-2003 13:28									#8
	Re: Why is Medieval Infantry 4.2.1 and Longbowmen 4.1.1? Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by King_Henry Is there any reasoning behind the fact that Medieval Infantry are 4.2.1 and Longbows are 4.1.1? Not only does the longbow come later, but it's also the same price. What's with this?

It's probably a sort of balance. In close combat, archers are very vulnerable. But at a distance they really rock. The combat system is too simplified to exploit things like this. Let's say as group of medieval infantry attacks longbowmen stationed on a hill within a castle/fortress. The attacking infantry will suffer heavily if they are not supported by some kind of artillery or rams. A longbow can have a range up to 1,5 km, meaning they can start picking their targets from a long distance especially if the attacking group moves close together.

	28-01-2003 13:53									#9
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

I don't really care for these new units. I think they could have put a little more thought in their costs and such.

	28-01-2003 14:57									#10
	Re: Re: Why is Medieval Infantry 4.2.1 and Longbowmen 4.1.1? Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by MoonWolf It's probably a sort of balance. In close combat, archers are very vulnerable. But at a distance they really rock. The combat system is too simplified to exploit things like this. Let's say as group of medieval infantry attacks longbowmen stationed on a hill within a castle/fortress. The attacking infantry will suffer heavily if they are not supported by some kind of artillery or rams. A longbow can have a range up to 1,5 km, meaning they can start picking their targets from a long distance especially if the attacking group moves close together.

Suffer heavily?!?!?!
Try plaing Shogun!!! With 60 Archers firing 60 arrows at the same time at enemy you kill... 1 or 2 soldiers!!!!!!!

	28-01-2003 16:00									#11
	Re: Re: Re: Why is Medieval Infantry 4.2.1 and Longbowmen 4.1.1? Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by epics Suffer heavily?!?!?! Try plaing Shogun!!! With 60 Archers firing 60 arrows at the same time at enemy you kill... 1 or 2 soldiers!!!!!!!

But if those archers were on the top of a wall 5 meters above the infantery? The soldiers could maybe knock out a few by using throwing stones, but would be an easy target otherwise.

I have some real life experience with this through roleplay games. Not the paper-and-dice version, but playing for real in the forrest (we are using soft weapons, so noone gets really hurt). If you stand with a bow and some arrows (slow, low-range with a "bulb" in the end to prevent damage) on a small hill looking down at the enemy, it's very easy to make some hits, especially if he/she is fighting.

Also, firing at people who are clustered close together, will as close as always hit someone

	29-01-2003 21:24									#12
	Support Apolyton

I can only say that playing with the acher bombard mod, I have come to like it, and have modded it to include all ranged weapons. It adds a bit of realism IMO, especially when attacking cities. I have also modded the longbow to 4.2.1 (as they upgrade to the same unit as MEI's)

I do have one question though, should I give the Sammurai a bombard value also, as they were accomplished bowmen, as well as swordsmen.

Notyoueither:

The biggest loss would be in the defense without infantry as you can always build Cav's with a 6 attack. The biggest strength of the Guerilla is that it requires no support, a definate plus to those cash strapped societies.