Treaty Strategy

Re: ARCHER VS SKI AS NATIVES

jeffro18 — Thu, 26 Apr 2012 13:26:59 GMT

ANKUR:
what about yumi , they already have rof3 , do they still have setup animation prob ?

they r f-ing archers what do u think

Re: ARCHER VS SKI AS NATIVES

ANKUR — Thu, 26 Apr 2012 12:27:25 GMT

what about yumi , they already have rof3 , do they still have setup animation prob ?

Re: ARCHER VS SKI AS NATIVES

LordStefanIII — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 23:08:44 GMT

Thranduil81:
Because ckn don't have the setup animation, just to clarify.
And the range for fp/aenna is 22/18 because of an upgrade from the war hut.

Do you know if ERK have setup animation?

Re: ARCHER VS SKI AS NATIVES

ANKUR — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 10:58:44 GMT

ok , thanks for the ans

is setup animation , what archer pull their bow everytime when targeting a new unit?

Re: ARCHER VS SKI AS NATIVES

Thranduil81 — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 08:40:38 GMT

Because ckn don't have the setup animation, just to clarify.

And the range for fp/aenna is 22/18 because of an upgrade from the war hut.

Re: ARCHER VS SKI AS NATIVES

LordStefanIII — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 06:58:47 GMT

I guess no one did tell you what set up animation is. An archer has setup animation everytime you move it. Setup animation is when the bow starts firing, and its at 3.0 ROF, then the archer continues to fire at 1.5 rof after that. but everytime you move it, it has to go through a setup animation. Also att move causes archers to repeatedly do the setup animation. Therefore archers are crap, unless they're the chinese ones.

Re: ARCHER VS SKI AS NATIVES

Taunty — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 06:57:21 GMT

tsnoe:
wakina rifle win in all cases, if you use teepes

LOL who bothers using tepees

Re: ARCHER VS SKI AS NATIVES

ANKUR — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 06:48:46 GMT

LordStefanIII:
Archers are just bad in treaty in general. Archers are extremely immobile. Skirms are very versatile and good at moving around the battle field. Anyway archers are terrible in TR. Using aenna over fp is like using spain pikes over rodelero. you just dont do it.
Fp have 22 range, but aenna also have +2 range over other archers.

aenna has speed 5, fp 4 , aenna are faster

cetan and wakina has 4 , they are same

than how archer are immobile ?

people use and prefer almost exclusively chukuno with china over arquebusir , chu has 50% more attack and almost same hp , but lesser range than arq , and using them make china wood heavy

still people use chu not arq, why ?

why not aenna or cetan they have much better stat than chu vs evrything

and for range issue , try to mix tham with ski

can anyone know about fire-animation of archer ?

Re: ARCHER VS SKI AS NATIVES

LordStefanIII — Tue, 24 Apr 2012 20:35:34 GMT

Archers are just bad in treaty in general. Archers are extremely immobile. Skirms are very versatile and good at moving around the battle field. Anyway archers are terrible in TR. Using aenna over fp is like using spain pikes over rodelero. you just dont do it.

Fp have 22 range, but aenna also have +2 range over other archers.

Re: ARCHER VS SKI AS NATIVES

ANKUR — Tue, 24 Apr 2012 19:54:15 GMT

knight_br:
aenna 70 atack????

where did u see this??

here is the real numbers and why we dont use aennas:

aena 36 atack, 18 range, 2x HI

Skirm 46 atack 22 range, 3x HI.

and aenna just have 30 more hp

gg

does fp has 22 range , i think they have 20 ?

btw aenna has rof1.5 , so there attack is double so its 36x2 vs 46(according to ur values)

Re: ARCHER VS SKI AS NATIVES

ANKUR — Tue, 24 Apr 2012 19:46:01 GMT

i didnt actually calculated all upgrades but archer has better stat than ski in any way , cetan and wakina has only 2 range difference , and 50% more base attack, better to kill other ski , tepee boost both as same , ceten dont need gold

while with irq aenna cost only food , thatz a VERY big advantage ,

i am suggesting , mix them with fp for better army and better long lasting eco ,

btw , what is fire animation ? , howz it affect effectiveness of a unit , can anyone explain plzzz

Re: ARCHER VS SKI AS NATIVES

Thranduil81 — Tue, 24 Apr 2012 18:45:44 GMT

@Tsnoe: Tepees add a % to the final stats as I said in my first post, they won't affect which is better.

With aenna losing to fp with attack move, it probably has something to do with the fire animation, you'd have to micro differently to get them to work well in treaty, and I don't know if there's a good way to do that.

And the range point is probably correct with sioux, though wakina only have 2 more range than cetan (18 to 16)

There are probably cases where you'd prefer the archers to the skirms, but you'd still need regular skirms at least some of the time, and the difference probably isn't enough to make up for the ~5k resc you spend to upgrade both

Re: ARCHER VS SKI AS NATIVES

LordStefanIII — Tue, 24 Apr 2012 18:34:58 GMT

I've done a Aenna vs FP test with my friend a few times. He was confident that aenna were better. Regardless of better stats, fp on attack move will wreck aenna.

Wakina over cetan. you're gonna need range with sioux, otherwise you're gonna have a hard time keeping teepees in range of cetan, in range of enemy skirms.

Re: ARCHER VS SKI AS NATIVES

Lukas_L99 — Tue, 24 Apr 2012 18:21:37 GMT

Aenna ROF 1.5, FP 3.0

Re: ARCHER VS SKI AS NATIVES

tsnoe — Tue, 24 Apr 2012 18:11:34 GMT

wakina rifle win in all cases, if you use teepes