Talk:Britons/Tree/@comment-213.204.238.117-20190403073635

Some possible arguments to speak of



Arbalest Vs Elite Longbowman favoritism.

I prefer Arbalests because:



~Faster production

~Made at wooden structure

~90% Accuracy (80% for Elite Longbowmen)

~1 less range + above = More likely to hit target





Elite Longbowmen benefits opposed to above:

~1 more Range

~1 more Damage (But does +2 vs Spearman line as opposed to +3 of Arbalest)

~1 more Pierce Armor



<p style="margin-bottom: 0cm; line-height: 100%">I prefer Arbalests. To explain. Compare the Teuton Bombard Tower (empty) to a Turkish One (empty). I'd call the Turkish one a deterence. As while it has 13 max Range. Projectile speed is the sams as if it had 8 Range. The Teuton one has max 10 Range. But that also means the total travel time of the fired projectile is shorter, thus making it more likely to hit the target. Thus making it more lethal because of the implied accuracy @ less Range.

<p style="margin-bottom: 0cm; line-height: 100%">Applying this notion to the Arbalest vs Elite Longbowman means 1 less range + 90% vs 80% accuracy = Much more likely to hit target. And in my personal experience. I experience faster killing rates with Arbalests than with Elite Longbowmen, especially against Elite Chu Ko Nu, who can be very damaging when allowed to get too close.

<p style="margin-bottom: 0cm; line-height: 100%">

<p style="margin-bottom: 0cm; line-height: 100%">Further More. Britons Elite Skirmishers have 9 Range and 90% Accuracy. I am willing to bet that one on one, even a Persian Elite Skirmisher will beat it. The first projectile of the Britons one will likely miss, as the Persian one still inches closer. The Persian has 7 max Range, and 100% Accuracy with Thumb Ring. Of course, when opposing Archery Units stand still, the Britons' Elite Skirmisher has the benefit. But considering the Strategic 11/12 Range Archers you use, most enemy Archers are not especially dangerous. Exceptions would be Plumed Archers, and Rattan Archers, and perhaps Imperial Skirmishers. Onagers deal better with them. Or Cavaliers. (Plate Barding helps)

<p style="margin-bottom: 0cm; line-height: 100%">

<p style="margin-bottom: 0cm; line-height: 100%">Britons Archers are Strategic. Their Infantry and Cavalry follow a tactical support role.

<p style="margin-bottom: 0cm; line-height: 100%">Archers of say Japanese and Saracens are Tactical, because of full upgrades, but conventional range.

<p style="margin-bottom: 0cm; line-height: 100%">

<p style="margin-bottom: 0cm; line-height: 100%">I see Britons' Archers as strategic, with like I said Infantry and Cavalry doing tactical support work. With Franks for example, their Heavy Cavalry is their Strategic focus, and Throwing Axemen, Hand Cannoneers, Halberdiers and/or Heavy Scorpions do the tactical work. (In this case, countering Halberdiers, Elephants, and Camels)

Opinions? Ideas?