use of HI v archer[split from How to play: Loyalists vs. Rebels]

Share and discuss strategies for playing the game, and get help and tips from other players.

Moderator: Forum Moderators

psychic
Posts: 86
Joined: July 30th, 2009, 10:18 pm

use of HI v archer[split from How to play: Loyalists vs. Rebels]

Post by psychic »

I dont understand why bowman gets a C+ and HI D-

HI is clearly better at defence role than an archer and 4 rebel units with a mage included have to struggle to kill one HI.

During attack their 2 strike high damage attack is much more effective against high defence units and if it fails they can survive frontline much better than archers. If rebels recruit a wose(a certainity against loyals for most rebel players), the loy army becomes equal speed or even faster if you get a quick HI thus archer normal speed advantage is negated.

Capriel mentioned how archers can be used against fighters, when you attack in the morning they are always going to have better terrain and hence a properly made wall with a HI is much better than one with a frontline archer.

So many times especially when rebels have gained a upper hand I have seen good players employ HI for defence due to what I mentioned earlier HI's unique ability to not die even from 4 hex attacks during rebel night time assault.
5dPZ
Posts: 201
Joined: July 11th, 2006, 7:20 pm
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Re: How to play: Loyalists vs. Rebels

Post by 5dPZ »

psychic wrote:I dont understand why bowman gets a C+ and HI D-

HI is clearly better at defence role than an archer and 4 rebel units with a mage included have to struggle to kill one HI.
....
I would say that archer is clearly a better unit compared with HI.

First of all - the price. 14g is base price for loyalist for a stable unit. 19g, however, belong to the luxary group.

2nd, speed and terran, for a "tidy" faction like loyalist, speed is very important. Archer is faster to attack and retreat and able to hold mountain at 60%.

3rd, defence and retaliation. The killers of rebel - mage, wose and shaman are not very effective vs a 60% def archer (esp at night). They are much more effective vs a 40% def HI.

Overall, an HI is slow and get caught easily. It could die to either mage/wose, or shaman+archer/fighter combo. However, a 14g, 60% def archer could survive at reasonable chance and give some retaliation damage (even against wose).
User avatar
Pentarctagon
Project Manager
Posts: 4651
Joined: March 22nd, 2009, 10:50 pm
Location: Earth (occasionally)

Re: How to play: Loyalists vs. Rebels

Post by Pentarctagon »

5dPZ wrote:However, a 14g, 60% def archer could survive at reasonable chance and give some retaliation damage (even against wose).
not really against a wose, seeing as the wose could regenerate all damage the archer could deal in one turn even during day.
99 little bugs in the code, 99 little bugs
take one down, patch it around
-2,147,483,648 little bugs in the code
User avatar
ParadiseCity
Posts: 119
Joined: May 24th, 2009, 3:51 pm
Location: I'm not sure yet...

Re: How to play: Loyalists vs. Rebels

Post by ParadiseCity »

The key to understanding why the bowman is better than the HI is understanding the roles that the two factions play in the match-up. Very generally, the loyalists will be playing the more offensive role(especially when using the cavalry strategy). There are two main reasons for that:

- Loyalists are lawful, meaning that they should advance during day and retreat during night. A skilled player will be able to either attack during day, or take a village, then retreat quickly. If done correctly, the rebel player will have minimum time uring night to attack.

-Secondly, the Rebels are slightly lawful. In a game against the loyalists who are fully lawful, they cannot launch a good offensive during day, unless the other player has made a large error. However, because they are neutral, they do not have power to remove a good loyalist defense at night. In addition, the wose(a key anti-loyalist unit) and the mage are both lawful, making it even harder to advance at night. Complementing that, is the wose's ambush ability, as well as its low movement.

Because of this, loyalists are more reliant on a successful offensive, while rebels rely primarily on a successful defense.

Now, what does this have to do with bowmen and HI? The fact that in a normal game, loyalists will be on the offensive most of the time. A 5dPZ highlighted, the bowman has better movement than a HI, making it easier to attack and easier to retreat. Bowmen can run, while HI often get caught and killed - if it gets to the fight at all.

In a defensive context, I feel that there is no matching the HI. However, since a bowman is still ok at defense, that advantage is less important. Even moreso, loyalists will rarely defend against rebels enough to make it worth the 19g cost.

For these reasons the bowman is better than the HI, though still not the best unit to use for the match.

EDIT:
Pentarctagon wrote:
5dPZ wrote:However, a 14g, 60% def archer could survive at reasonable chance and give some retaliation damage (even against wose).
not really against a wose, seeing as the wose could regenerate all damage the archer could deal in one turn even during day.
I would disagree. If a wose is defening against a loyalist assault with a bowman in it, and attacks the bowman, it can help the loyalist kill the wose on their turn. Keep in mind that regeneration is only after the loyalist has continued to attack, if the wose lives.

A bowman has an attack of 4-2(5-2 strong), which is bumped up to 5-2(6-2) during day. Given a wose's 20% dodge on flat, that means that a bowman can inflict up to 12 damage of retaliation. That effectively reduces that wose's hp to 40 from 52, making it that much easier to kill.

P.S. 100th post! :geek:
"The harder I work, the more luck I seem to have." -Thomas Jefferson
psychic
Posts: 86
Joined: July 30th, 2009, 10:18 pm

Re: How to play: Loyalists vs. Rebels

Post by psychic »

5dPZ wrote: I would say that archer is clearly a better unit compared with HI.

First of all - the price. 14g is base price for loyalist for a stable unit. 19g, however, belong to the luxary group.

2nd, speed and terran, for a "tidy" faction like loyalist, speed is very important. Archer is faster to attack and retreat and able to hold mountain at 60%.
These are general comparison of a unit's capabilities which shows nothing about its role in a strategy.
5dPZ wrote: 3rd, defence and retaliation. The killers of rebel - mage, wose and shaman are not very effective vs a 60% def archer (esp at night). They are much more effective vs a 40% def HI.
If wose reaches loy's base at night, it is equal to sacrifising it 20 gold (apart from the extras getting trapped by the fencer) for 19 gold which i would gladly trade. Except wose nothing else can credibly damage HI in the night. Even mages need 3-4 hexes to take out a HI in the night.
ParadiseCity wrote:The key to understanding why the bowman is better than the HI is understanding the roles that the two factions play in the match-up. Very generally, the loyalists will be playing the more offensive role(especially when using the cavalry strategy). There are two main reasons for that:
I should say I do not understand "offensive". In a push pull scenario if both the players are good, both will push till the bases during their respective time of the day and hence do not understand what you mean by offensive.
ParadiseCity wrote: - Loyalists are lawful, meaning that they should advance during day and retreat during night. A skilled player will be able to either attack during day, or take a village, then retreat quickly. If done correctly, the rebel player will have minimum time uring night to attack.

-Secondly, the Rebels are slightly lawful. In a game against the loyalists who are fully lawful, they cannot launch a good offensive during day, unless the other player has made a large error. However, because they are neutral, they do not have power to remove a good loyalist defense at night. In addition, the wose(a key anti-loyalist unit) and the mage are both lawful, making it even harder to advance at night. Complementing that, is the wose's ambush ability, as well as its low movement.
Because of this, loyalists are more reliant on a successful offensive, while rebels rely primarily on a successful defense.
You have said here something really specific to one playstyle. A defensive player can very well use a HI dependant strategy. Besides if you lose a few horses to rng what will you be recruiting for defence? Only HI can buy you the extra time.
Since rebels are considerably lawful(Both their heviest attackers are lawful) and they will hold better terrain during loy offensive, I dont see a situation where they are overwhelmingly threatened even during day, hence they dont have to concede a lot of terrain to save units.

On the core topic of bowman and HI vs rebels. My take since the begining is this - both are not really useful for general playstyle. However during a few situation and/or defensive playstyle HI has uses and even then loy archer completely sucks in this matchup. Hence I would like HI to be ranked higher than archer.
monochromatic
Posts: 1549
Joined: June 18th, 2009, 1:45 am

Re: How to play: Loyalists vs. Rebels

Post by monochromatic »

@psychic I personally disagree, but I respect your opinions. I would just like to make a small comment:

You posed me with this question earlier in the thread:
psychic wrote:Why do you have to dislodge the elf unit on the forest hex first? If you answer that question you will know how less important the mage is and how much more better horseman is.
I'll ask you the same: if you were the Rebels player, why do you need to take out the HI first? In your situation, Elves have a certain advantage; archers have 6 base mp, scouts 9, and the rest except the wose 5. If the Rebel player senses that the Loyalists are avoiding the forests, he/she can easily reposition his/her units to deal the loyalist threat. OTOH, HI only have 4mp. So when those fast Rebel units attack in a different spot than you expect, the HI would not have time to reposition themselves. Not to mention shamans. I can see the Rebel player throw a shaman at the HI to slow them and then have the rest of the army attack on the other side.

Let's just say that HI would benefit defensively more in smaller maps like Isar's Cross. Otherwise, units like the spearman and maybe bowmen are suggested.

EDIT: Added an extra thought to the main section.
psychic
Posts: 86
Joined: July 30th, 2009, 10:18 pm

Re: How to play: Loyalists vs. Rebels

Post by psychic »

elvish_sovereign wrote: You posed me with this question earlier in the thread:
psychic wrote:Why do you have to dislodge the elf unit on the forest hex first? If you answer that question you will know how less important the mage is and how much more better horseman is.
I'll ask you the same: if you were the Rebels player, why do you need to take out the HI first? In your situation, Elves have a certain advantage; archers have 6 base mp, scouts 9, and the rest except the wose 5. If the Rebel player senses that the Loyalists are avoiding the forests, he/she can easily reposition his/her units to deal the loyalist threat. OTOH, HI only have 4mp. So when those fast Rebel units attack in a different spot than you expect, the HI would not have time to reposition themselves. Not to mention shamans. I can see the Rebel player throw a shaman at the HI to slow them and then have the rest of the army attack on the other side.
The above does not show how the loy archer is superior than HI in this match up and hence answering any of the above questions merely moves the discussion away from the topic. My question has yet to answered: how is a loy archer which has no use in this match up rated higher than HI which like I have denoted has a few situational/strategic uses?

Edit: Apart from that your guide with the 2 type of initial recruits for 2 different strategies looks good. I would prefer adding 1 fencer in the initial recruit in both cases.
psychic
Posts: 86
Joined: July 30th, 2009, 10:18 pm

Re: How to play: Loyalists vs. Rebels

Post by psychic »

elvish_sovereign wrote: @psychic I don't think I'll continue the loy archer debate. I feel everyone has a different view on each unit. I believe the intent of the "How to Play..." Series is to only give a general overview of the tactics and strategies for each faction. Compared to that, I think this debate over one unit is insignificant.
I realise the full intent of the series and if my points seem advanced atleast make archer and HI of same rating, since both do not contribute in this match up a lot for the beginner. A C+ vs a D- will make a new player think archer might have some uses over the HI.
User avatar
ParadiseCity
Posts: 119
Joined: May 24th, 2009, 3:51 pm
Location: I'm not sure yet...

Re: How to play: Loyalists vs. Rebels

Post by ParadiseCity »

I had a huge response to you psychic, but I accidentally clicked a link and lost it all. So here's the short version:

You have yet to disprove the fact that loyalists are more offensive. You have only said that you don't understand my point. However, you then went on to say that a person could be defensive. That's contradicting yourself.

As you yourself said
if both the players are good, both will push till the bases during their respective time of the day
My point is that having the slow HI in your arsenal takes away from the loyalist ability to do so. I proved two points about why loyalists attack more, both of which pointed to the fact that they can deal more damage when compared to rebels.

Because of that, the bowman, which is a decent defense, and a mobile offense is better than a HI.

None of this should be any news to you, as I highlighted it in my posts before this, I am merely pointing out that what you are saying doesn't logically flow.

Anyways, I think we should respect elvish and not bring any new arguements or such into his thread. Maybe a different thread is in order? :hmm:
"The harder I work, the more luck I seem to have." -Thomas Jefferson
psychic
Posts: 86
Joined: July 30th, 2009, 10:18 pm

Re: How to play: Loyalists vs. Rebels

Post by psychic »

ParadiseCity wrote: You have yet to disprove the fact that loyalists are more offensive. You have only said that you don't understand my point. However, you then went on to say that a person could be defensive. That's contradicting yourself.
Since I am not able to understand what you said in the first place how do you expect me to reply to such a thing? And how is me telling that a person plays defensively contradicting myself?
ParadiseCity wrote: My point is that having the slow HI in your arsenal takes away from the loyalist ability to do so. I proved two points about why loyalists attack more, both of which pointed to the fact that they can deal more damage when compared to rebels.
Loyalists have slightly more damage in the day while rebels have slightly more damage in the night due to rebels loyal allignment, hence you telling that loyalists deal more damage in general is kind of vague.
ParadiseCity wrote: Because of that, the bowman, which is a decent defense, and a mobile offense is better than a HI.

None of this should be any news to you, as I highlighted it in my posts before this, I am merely pointing out that what you are saying doesn't logically flow.
Again coming to the core discussion of archer vs HI, think about it archer can only effectively be used against a fighter and defences wrecks havoc even in that and it makes for a hole in your frontline defence. In defence the archer is no match to a HI as you have already accepted. And nelson has even given a strategy involving HI.
Coming to the speed part, since wose is a necessary component for rebels in this match up the speed of archer does not matter compared to the speed of HI. All I am saying is that archer has absolutely no use in this matchup while HI can be effectively used in certain strategies and in deep defence.
elvish_sovereign wrote: I've posted this on the wiki. Thanks for all of your comments!
Sorry if this sounds arrogant. Even after all the points I have given against archer compared to HI and posting a strategy involving HI by nelson you still do not want to change the ratings of these 2 units. This guide when read by a noob and when his strategy is failing will recruit an archer compared to a HI based on this guide. This is apart from the fact that most noobs play defensive and hug to terrain and villages where HI is a clearly a good buy.
You have neither given good arguments for your rating in this particular case nor have you changed the rating based on comments.
Velensk
Multiplayer Contributor
Posts: 3991
Joined: January 24th, 2007, 12:56 am

Re: How to play: Loyalists vs. Rebels

Post by Velensk »

Most noobs I meet do not play defensively or hug terrain. Now granted, they don't tend to flow with the time of day either but I really don't think it matters.
"There are two kinds of old men in the world. The kind who didn't go to war and who say that they should have lived fast died young and left a handsome corpse and the old men who did go to war and who say that there is no such thing as a handsome corpse."
psychic
Posts: 86
Joined: July 30th, 2009, 10:18 pm

Re: How to play: Loyalists vs. Rebels

Post by psychic »

Velensk wrote:Most noobs I meet do not play defensively or hug terrain. Now granted, they don't tend to flow with the time of day either but I really don't think it matters.
I should have used newbs, what I meant were players who understand game basics like defences and time of day but not advanced enough to use them really effectively. :wink:
Eskon
Posts: 184
Joined: August 12th, 2008, 2:21 pm
Location: Esslingen, Germany

Re: How to play: Loyalists vs. Rebels

Post by Eskon »

That's because bowmen are less of a waste of money than heavy infantry is. a) They cost less to begin with, meaning there is less money to waste. b) They defend well versus archers (especially on villages, fortifications and mountains) and to some extent mages, thanks to decent HP and retaliation (5-3 at night), which has been pointed out several times. Heavy infantry, on the other hand, does nothing offensively that a spearman can't do better. c) They do okay in defense at night because the rebel mages and woses are reduced in damage, but since they are so slow if you want to use them in offense you won't often have the opportunity to retreat them to the place they need to be. Either they are dead weight, or you end up exposing them in retreat. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. And it's not like they're impossible to take out. Even supposed the rebel doesn't use woses due to the threat of mages, rebel mages still do 6-3 at night and elvish archers have little trouble hitting them through 40% defense anyway. Also, shamans can slow them so that the fighters can join in on the fun with okay results.

And I don't think there is any danger of noobs recruiting the wrong units due to this guide. Bowmen and heavy infantry get the lowest ratings of all the units, so they will look to the others. It's not as if rating should guide recruit decisions anyway; you should scout your opponent's units and recruit the correct counter. It's just that neither of these units counter much of anything, and bowmen are less of a waste.
psychic
Posts: 86
Joined: July 30th, 2009, 10:18 pm

Re: How to play: Loyalists vs. Rebels

Post by psychic »

Eskon wrote:That's because bowmen are less of a waste of money than heavy infantry is.
a) They cost less to begin with, meaning there is less money to waste.
Accepted
Eskon wrote: b) They defend well versus archers (especially on villages, fortifications and mountains) and to some extent mages, thanks to decent HP and retaliation (5-3 at night), which has been pointed out several times.
Which is a really stupid point since you dont get to choose which units attack you in defence. Rebels will obviously not use archers or mages against them.
Eskon wrote: Heavy infantry, on the other hand, does nothing offensively that a spearman can't do better. c) They do okay in defense at night because the rebel mages and woses are reduced in damage, but since they are so slow if you want to use them in offense you won't often have the opportunity to retreat them to the place they need to be.
okay in defence?? They are clearly the best defenders for loys in the night, every mage recruited by a rebel is an archer less and needs protection. So if they go more than 2 mages just to take out an HI they will get steam rolled in the day.
Again I am stressing this: since wose is a necessity for rebels in this match up the speed of HI vs archer does not matter in the argument.
Eskon wrote: And I don't think there is any danger of noobs recruiting the wrong units due to this guide. Bowmen and heavy infantry get the lowest ratings of all the units, so they will look to the others. It's not as if rating should guide recruit decisions anyway; you should scout your opponent's units and recruit the correct counter. It's just that neither of these units counter much of anything, and bowmen are less of a waste.
There is a clear difference of C+ to archer which has absolutely no use as has been proved to D- for HI which has situational and certain strategic use. Non english speakers predominantly use the ratings is my logical conclusion. And if you notice the fencer explanation text has not been modified since the begining and is in a negative tone. But after the discussions he has only improved the rating to B+ and if what you claim about rating is true then we need to review the write up for some other units also.
psychic
Posts: 86
Joined: July 30th, 2009, 10:18 pm

Re: How to play: Loyalists vs. Rebels

Post by psychic »

Eskon wrote:That's because bowmen are less of a waste of money than heavy infantry is.
a) They cost less to begin with, meaning there is less money to waste.
Accepted
Eskon wrote: b) They defend well versus archers (especially on villages, fortifications and mountains) and to some extent mages, thanks to decent HP and retaliation (5-3 at night), which has been pointed out several times.
Which is a really stupid point since you dont get to choose which units attack you in defence. Rebels will obviously not use archers or mages against them.
Eskon wrote: Heavy infantry, on the other hand, does nothing offensively that a spearman can't do better. c) They do okay in defense at night because the rebel mages and woses are reduced in damage, but since they are so slow if you want to use them in offense you won't often have the opportunity to retreat them to the place they need to be.
okay in defence?? They are clearly the best defenders for loys in the night, every mage recruited by a rebel is an archer less and needs protection and like I have said before every wose reaching HI in the night is a sacrifice. So if they go more than 2 mages just to take out an HI they will get steam rolled in the day.
Again I am stressing this: since wose is a necessity for rebels in this match up the speed of HI vs archer does not matter in the argument.
Eskon wrote: And I don't think there is any danger of noobs recruiting the wrong units due to this guide. Bowmen and heavy infantry get the lowest ratings of all the units, so they will look to the others. It's not as if rating should guide recruit decisions anyway; you should scout your opponent's units and recruit the correct counter. It's just that neither of these units counter much of anything, and bowmen are less of a waste.
[/quote]
There is a clear difference of C+ to archer which has absolutely no use as has been proved to D- for HI which has situational and certain strategic use. Non english speakers predominantly use the ratings is my logical conclusion. And if you notice the fencer explanation text has not been modified since the begining and is in a negative tone. But after the discussions he has only improved the rating to B+ and if what you claim about rating is true then we need to review the write up for some other units also.

Before any further arguments can be made, I am looking at the effectiveness from a strategic point of view and archer has absolutely no use whereas HI can be used in certain situations/strategies.
Post Reply