Best Archers

[felix77]

I read a lot of good things about Rhodok and Swadian sharpshooters. I don't really agree though. Of the faction archers, I think Vaegir are the better. However, for all around performance I'd have to say Sword Sisters. Better armor and more melee capabilities means they are more useful and survive longer. I have used them in Fire arrow and they are quite impressive, are they as good in native?

 

[Cyborg Eastern European]

Never got my hands on any sword sisters in native ever since they cut off the easy supply of peasant women and refugees.

 

[Berpol]

What archer is better depends on the situation so here my personal opinions:

Khergit horse archers: Comparable in equipment and skill to the Vaegir, they have heavier armor but not all of them wear helmets, this can lead to unnecessary losses, especially if you fight against them...
Rhodok sharpshooters: Best crossbow archer you can get, they have good armor, good weapon skills and the heavier crossbows.
Swadian sharpshooters: Inferior in equipment to the Rhodok.
Vaegir marksman: Some twohanded weapons allow some good hits in melee, they still lack the armor.
Nord veteran archer: Inferior in skill and equipment to the Vaegir.
Sword sister: Usually not counted among the archers as they don't always have a crossbow. Their crossbow is inferior to that used by the Rhodok but their armor and melee equipment is superior. Should you manage to get a good supply of them they might be a good line of protection for your dedicated missile troops but for that I usually recommend Nord. As cavalry they lack heavy mounts, they loose their horses rather fast so they function better as mounted infantry.

 

[felix77]

What I mean is best all around archer. Since recruiting different archers for each task isn't feasible, which would you bring with you?

 

[Swadius 2.0]

I read a lot of good things about Rhodok and Swadian sharpshooters. I don't really agree though. Of the faction archers, I think Vaegir are the better. However, for all around performance I'd have to say Sword Sisters. Better armor and more melee capabilities means they are more useful and survive longer. I have used them in Fire arrow and they are quite impressive, are they as good in native?

You need to read into the specific about why some people, like me, prefer Rhodok sharpshooters over their Vaegir counterparts. The main reason being is that they are very well armored, even in relation to actual heavy infantry, they get a very good weapon that can deal with heavily armored foes, they have quite admirable melee skills and attributes, they have the best crossbow and bolts available, and they're relatively easier to train that the Vaegir Marksmen due to the lower level.
They're like the Space Marines of Calradia. They don't quite specialize in range or melee capabilities or have the strongest range weapon or the biggest hand to hand weapons, but given the competition, they perform quite well. More so that one would expect.
In practice, I rarely find myself ever needing to retreat and have my men refill their ammunition like the archers who quickly expend their ammunition. Even if the Sharpshooters run out of bolts, I wouldn't be afraid to use them in a melee situation. Moreover, using the battle sizer on it's higher limits, most projectile armies never quite finish off everyone charging at them. Sure, against low numbers and unarmored slow foes would allow a Vaegir Marksmen army to incur no loses, but against a force of mixed troops like the Swadians who do use a significant number of cavalry or Rhodok troops who have large shields, Rhodok sharpshooters would get you better results than the Marksmen.

 

[Virmin]

How come Forest bandits aren't up there? They seem really good considering how cheap they are. Perhaps the best cost-to-performance ratio? I think their wages are only 5 denars so you could probably have four times as many of them as you would other factions top tier ranged units for the same cost.

 

[phantom67]

^^^Ditto, I get shot a lot more often by Forest Bandits than by anything else.

 

[RalliX]

Dismounted Khergit vet. horse archers = the shiz.

 

[Turona]

Khergit archers are also slightly faster to level, a few levels lower than other archers (excluding Nord archers).

 

[Berpol]

Dismounted Khergit vet. horse archers = the shiz.

Is that good or bad?

Khergit archers are also slightly faster to level, a few levels lower than other archers (excluding Nord archers).

That's because the Khergit cheat with their advancement. Normally with each advancement you get about 5 levels

• Khergit Lancer - they cheat, they are only tier 4 with all the stats of a tier 5 troop.
• Khergit Veteran Horse Archer- they also cheat, the Khergit Horse archer is tier 4 but with a level like the tier 3 troop so they advance faster.

The Rhodok also cheat:

• Rhodok Sharpshooter - they are only tier 4 with all the stats of a tier 5 troop.

The Nord are also a bit different though they all advance about 5 levels each upgrade:

• Nord Huscarl - they are the only tier 6 troop.
• Nord Veteran Archers - they are only tier 4.

 

[Temuçin]

I voted for Rhodok sharpshooters. They are excellent archers and pretty capable in melee.

Do you think Nord Veteran Achers any good ? I like look of their longbows.

 

[The_Invincible_Knight]

Khergits are a nightmare in large numbers in a pitched battle. Vaegir Marksmen are extremely deadly in a siege. I participated in a battle of each kind. Both times it was the Swadians against them.

In the open battle, though I cut down more Khergits than I could count, the Swadians took terrible losses (it was like watching the Persians against the forces of Leonidas before they were shown the secret route).

In the siege, the Swadian forces were shot mercilessly by Vaegir archers and marksmen. Their rapid firing and decent melee capability meant that the Swadians were left utterly defeated. As before, I slaughtered a great number of Vaegirs of all kinds, before I was cornered and defeated.

If you never get close, I'd say the Khergits are deadlier, but if you get close up, they're fairly easy to slay. The Vaegirs are a little more challenging in melee.

Khergit horse archers are worse than any other archer, however, for the simple reason that your troops will find them difficult to surround and defeat, due to their high speed and maneuverability. So my vote is for the "Horse Lords" of Mount and Blade - the Khergits.

 

[Swadius 2.0]

隐藏

Khergits are a nightmare in large numbers in a pitched battle. Vaegir Marksmen are extremely deadly in a siege. I participated in a battle of each kind. Both times it was the Swadians against them.

In the open battle, though I cut down more Khergits than I could count, the Swadians took terrible losses (it was like watching the Persians against the forces of Leonidas before they were shown the secret route).

In the siege, the Swadian forces were shot mercilessly by Vaegir archers and marksmen. Their rapid firing and decent melee capability meant that the Swadians were left utterly defeated. As before, I slaughtered a great number of Vaegirs of all kinds, before I was cornered and defeated.

If you never get close, I'd say the Khergits are deadlier, but if you get close up, they're fairly easy to slay. The Vaegirs are a little more challenging in melee.

Khergit horse archers are worse than any other archer, however, for the simple reason that your troops will find them difficult to surround and defeat, due to their high speed and maneuverability. So my vote is for the "Horse Lords" of Mount and Blade - the Khergits.

Have you tried taking a Rhodok held castle before with a lot of sharpshooters inside? It's as if trying to take a town full of Nord veterans who also coincidentally have the best crossbows.

 

[xizeludex]

i vote in khergit because i think they are the best with bows and have a great evolution tree

 

[Bulzeeb]

As pure archers, my vote goes to the Vaegir Marksmen, who deal the most damage the fastest. Arrows being expended quickly is a disadvantage only if most of those arrows are at very long ranges and are therefore useless, and most of the battles I fight end too soon for archers to run out of ammo anyway. The exception is siege assault, but in that case I would rather have an army of marksmen quickly fire off all their arrows and deal massive damage to defenders whereas crossbowmen would have only fired off a fraction of their bolts, then retreat and do it again.

I haven't had much experience with mounted archers, but their lower accuracy makes them less effective in all situations except for skirmish. So unless I was fielding only horse archers I'd rather have regular archers. I've had even less experience with Sword Sisters, but the difficulty of recruiting them precludes them from receiving the title of "best archers".

I don't value the melee capabilities of archers because pure melee infantry are better at the job. The only circumstance in which I would want my archers fighting is if my infantry line is beginning to break. Though in all honesty I rarely ever field archers, so perhaps melee is more important than I think.

 

[Swadius 2.0]

I don't tend to use Vaegir archers very much, due to my computer not being able to handle large enough battle sizes to handle battle within one wave.

Is this problem a rare one, because not many of you seem to worry about your troop's ammunition at all first or second wave at all.

 

[Ravenheild]

You all are insane, expending your ammo quickly isn't a problem if you do it all at the right time.  That's why they added the hold your fire command because once you do order them to fire, everything in your path dies a horrible arrow related death.  Vaegirs all the way.

 

[Swadius 2.0]

True, but against a party that has a significant number of cavalry, I don't think you can afford to hold fire until they're breathing on you.

 

[Ravenheild]

Then don't hold against cav is the easiest suggestion.  In battles I always let my enemy come to me and I just take the highest hill near the starting position.  That allows for a little extra time to position my infantry (whatever ragtag troops i happen to have) a little lower on the hill to absorb the charge of any cavalry.

 

[The Bowman]

This is the greatest mistake, don't put your archers on a hill, they waste their ammo due low accuracy. Place your archers behind a hill, they will shoot better.