RESOLUTION: Archer X Mounted Archer

[Pedrunn]

Archer
Attack 10
Defense 10
Ranged 20
Movement 1
Vision 2
Production Cost 150

Mounted Archer
Attack 10
Defense 10
Ranged 20
Movement 3
Vision 2
Production Cost 340

So the diference between mounted archer are the movement and the Production cost.

So does anyone actually think that the bonus of the 2 extra movement points does worth the Production cost difference which is more than twice as much?

I do belive i rather have 2 archers rather than only 1 Mounted archer.
After all when stacked the Hoplite (the base of our stack force)can only move 1 tile per turn slowing the Mounted Archer.

And I must warn that in 12 turns both of these units will be replaced by Catapult that like the archer has only one move point like the archer.


This poll expires in 3 three days (09/04/2003)

[Pedrunn]

I want to have 2 Archers rather than 1 Mounted Archers.

Locutus, I forgot to add the expiring day fot 3 days in the poll options. If you could change that would be nice. If not doesnt matter.

[Immortal Wombat]

Yeah, archers, until we have some scirmish infantry which can use the extra movement.

[Tamerlin]

We need to produce mounted archers now or we will end with an obsolete army. When we have the skirmishers we will already have built the Mounted Archers and will have saved a lot of time.

[Locutus]

Locutus, I forgot to add the expiring day fot 3 days in the poll options. If you could change that would be nice. If not doesnt matter.

Done.

Agreed, we can continue to build Archers for now, though it would be useful to have at least 1 full stack of Samurai plus Mounted Archers in the future, mainly for defensive purposes.

[HuangShang]

from what ive heard, i'd think mounted archers would fare better

the regular archers will be utterly obsolete in a couple turns, but a mounted army of some archers would be perfect toward mp duties

[Pedrunn]

Both Archers and Mounted Archer will wont be a building option in a few turns with Geometry. We will only build Catapult with this advance since they have Ranged attack 30 (oppose to 20 of Archers and Mounted Arches) and can bombard.

HuangShang, speacking of obsolecy as defined in the game all three units: Archers, Mounted Archers and Catapults will only become obsolete at the same time with the research of Cannon Making.

[Gilgamensch]

As Locutus already said:

Some could be usefull for defensive purpose.

Together with a slaver they make a good hunting tool for barbs .
Every battle with an slaver involved would give us a new slave/size +1 in on of our cities.........

But for our armies (as we are still using just units with 100 MP, or in other words 1 move per turn) it would be waste of production.

[Locutus]

Pedrunn, the higher movement value of Mounted Archers still makes them very, very useful, even with Catapults available. Combined with Knights or Samurai, they serve as excellent fast-moving shock forces and mobile border guards. Plus, they're a hell-of-a-lot cheaper...

BTW, the higher ranged value of Catapults is nice but worthless in comparison to its higher damage value (2 instead of 1)...

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

for "normal" armies (hoplites+archers later catapults) mounted archers are waste of ressources. so there should actually be a question/poll like "do we need mobile forces?". if that is answered with a yes, then we should build a fair mix of samurai (better knights) and mounted archers to have lets say 2 stacks of 3/3 spread over our territory which could easily combined to a big stack using our roadnetwork if thats necessary.

[Devil of Truth]

If the question is "Which ranged unit will defend our cities?" then the choice is obvious. Archers.

If the unit will be fortified within the city, then why would an Archer need a horse at $190 more to stand still? Archers have the same defensive values as Mounted Archers. Using mobile units for defence is an extraordinary waste of resources and a strategic faux pax of epic proportions.

Rather use Mounted Archers for roving patrols or to enslave Barbs.

[Locutus]

When you use ranged units to defend cities their defensive value is hardly relevant, it's their ranged value (as well as damage) that counts. Catapults are the best choice here, especially since they can also bombard besieging units (but until we have them Archers will indeed do fine).

However, you don't only want to defend cities, you also want to defend borders, tile imps, settlers, intercepting barbs and unconvential units, etc. You want to have a bunch of defensive units that you can move swiftly wherever they are needed most. For all this you need mobile forces - i.e. Mounted Archers.

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

one question: we are playing without any unitupdater script, thats right?

[Locutus]

Indeed. We'll have to do all our updating ourselves

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

in that case we shouldn't build anymore archers at all.

[Locutus]

Well, there's still 13 turns to go before we get Catapults...

Plus, the poll suggests otherwise...

[Pedrunn]

Another 2 votes to win peoples

Lets go!

[Tamerlin]

Yes, unfortunately we are playing without Peter and Pedrunn's Updater2.

Though I disagree with the result of this Resolution I will follow the wish of the Citizens and order Archers to be built instead of Mounted Archers.

[Martin Gühmann]

Originally posted by Zaphod Beeblebrox
one question: we are playing without any unitupdater script, thats right?

To update our units we have the Austrians and the Germans, so build new units and the outdated ones can be used to weaken the enemy.

Well Tamerlin you don't have to follow the outcome of the resolution, we need 9 Yes votes and less No votes then Yes Votes so taht the RESOLUTION can be considered as passed. But I recommend to follow the will of the people.

-Martin