Thinking Archers Need Nerfs

[Seenan]

With about 70+ of them and maybe a few supply carts, they'll never die unless a mortar can 1-2 shot them and they'll raze a building (even higher hp buildings) nearly instantly...70 archers at, let's say, ~30 damage is 2100 DPS on buildings and 8400 on any sort of defender. Maybe keep the damage vs defenders but nerf their damage vs buildings. As maybe another addition, add more Soldier vs Horseman power so that the soldier's power vs them is more defined and wont just get dumped on by a horseman...weakness, my butt.

The reason I posted this is because the only time I've been getting raided is through mass-archer raids and it's getting pretty cheesy/ridiculous. There's only two attackers on my list (extending to ~4 days ago) that didn't have archers as their main point of offense against buildings (aka, their archers are not the most troop count by far).

To Summarize:

-Soldier vs Horseman buff (one ordinary soldier should be able to take out one ordinary horseman of the same tier if they can't already, with ease) as well as a tooltip update for soldiers v horseman damage
-Archer vs Buildings+Walls/Maybe Horseman nerf or a unit cap on archers (I'd rather the nerf, tbh)

But while I'm making a topic about buffs/nerfs, if you could update the AI of troops ignoring holes in the wall because another building is closer behind a wall 10 cells down from that hole, that'd be great too.

For a concentrated player, an archer raid can very easily just wipe out >half someone's base with proper placements, and that becomes far more likely on British troops with +1 range with a tier-up on you. Suddenly a cannon here and there seems pretty useless compared to 28 archers (2 cannons worth) dealing more dps at farther ranges.

I'd like to see some actual variation in attack patterns, not hive-minding/following what some kid on youtube is showing you to be a cheesy strat. And I don't care about the resources or trophies they steal, the 'strategy' itself just bothers me.

 

[xGraves]

+1, They need to make walls function properly. As long as archers (and cannons) can fire over them, they're going to be OP. I say a nerf is in order, as well, but I'm betting on a letter in the mail that says someone has a hit out on me, as a result of this blasphemous suggestion.

 

[Seenan]

+1, They need to make walls function properly. As long as archers (and cannons) can fire over them, they're going to be OP. I say a nerf is in order, as well, but I'm betting on a letter in the mail that says someone has a hit out on me, as a result of this blasphemous suggestion.

The firing over walls for archers does kind of make sense, but even then, walls die pretty fast too...Upgraded walls should be the last thing to die fast to an archer. In terms of the British archers, if there's a wall obstructing a building, they should have to move up a range to shoot inside rather than still having the buffed range and shooting your towers from across your city. If it's just a naked building in the middle of somewhere, the range makes sense. But since everything is basically ranged except Horsemen later on, walls should work as more than just a hurdle.

 

[_Flash_]

A quick fact-check on statements made on this thread.

Suddenly a cannon here and there seems pretty useless compared to 28 archers (2 cannons worth) dealing more dps at farther ranges.

1. 2 cannons take up the troop space of 18 archers, and not 28 archers.
2. Cannons have a range of 5, against regular archers who have a range of 4. Only the British archers have a range of 5, and their range of 5 equals that of the cannons/siege units. Archers do not deal out damage at ranges farther than a cannon.
3. 9 archers don't seem to deal out more damage than an equivalent siege unit for the corresponding age. I'm looking at the statistics on my British base in Gunpowder Age. Yeomanry have DPS of 33. Bombard has a DPS of 387. DPS of 9 Yeomanry (33 * 9 = 297) is less than the DPS dealt by a bombard of the same age.

The firing over walls for archers does kind of make sense, but even then, walls die pretty fast too...Upgraded walls should be the last thing to die fast to an archer.

Level 7 walls (max walls of Medieval Age) have HP of 12,210. Level 9 walls (max walls of Gunpowder Age) have HP of 18,612 (I'm checking on my Industrial Age base, because I don't yet have level 9 walls on my Gunpowder Age base). Even with the 70 archer scenario, they would deal a combined DPS of 2,310. That would take them 6 shots to break a level 7 wall, which is the upgraded wall one age lower. And, it would take them about 8 shots to break a level 9 wall. I don't really see where upgraded walls die fast to an archer.

But since everything is basically ranged except Horsemen later on, walls should work as more than just a hurdle.

Horsemen become ranged when they get upgraded to tanks in Industrial Age.

 

[Empire]

Horsemen become ranged when they get upgraded to tanks in Industrial Age.

Horsemen don't become ranged in the sense that they can't shoot over walls. They just gain the ability to shoot.

 

[_Flash_]

Horsemen don't become ranged in the sense that they can't shoot over walls. They just gain the ability to shoot.

Tanks get a range of 3, as do fusiliers and raiders who get a range of 1.5. None of these units can shoot over walls. So, the statement in the post saying "But since everything is basically ranged except Horsemen later on" is inaccurate, which is what I've pointed out

 

[Empire]

Tanks get a range of 3, as do fusiliers and raiders who get a range of 1.5. None of these units can shoot over walls. So, the statement in the post saying "But since everything is basically ranged except Horsemen later on" is inaccurate, which is what I've pointed out

Okay, but it can be misconstrued.

 

[Seenan]

A quick fact-check on statements made on this thread.

1. 2 cannons take up the troop space of 18 archers, and not 28 archers.
2. Cannons have a range of 5, against regular archers who have a range of 4. Only the British archers have a range of 5, and their range of 5 equals that of the cannons/siege units. Archers do not deal out damage at ranges farther than a cannon.
3. 9 archers don't seem to deal out more damage than an equivalent siege unit for the corresponding age. I'm looking at the statistics on my British base in Gunpowder Age. Yeomanry have DPS of 33. Bombard has a DPS of 387. DPS of 9 Yeomanry (33 * 9 = 297) is less than the DPS dealt by a bombard of the same age.

Level 7 walls (max walls of Medieval Age) have HP of 12,210. Level 9 walls (max walls of Gunpowder Age) have HP of 18,612 (I'm checking on my Industrial Age base, because I don't yet have level 9 walls on my Gunpowder Age base). Even with the 70 archer scenario, they would deal a combined DPS of 2,310. That would take them 6 shots to break a level 7 wall, which is the upgraded wall one age lower. And, it would take them about 8 shots to break a level 9 wall. I don't really see where upgraded walls die fast to an archer.



Horsemen become ranged when they get upgraded to tanks in Industrial Age.

To be honest, I vaguely remembered the Ballista strain of troops having 14 troop space...maybe I was thinking of someone else. or maybe I typo'd. both likely possibilities. In any case, that downsizes my point for Cannons vs archers I guess. Moving on.

If you weren't paying attention to that paragraph I mentioned the Cannon ranges in, the sentence before that I was talking about the British archers. So wouldn't you think I would be, you know, referring to the British archers? DPS does not mean shots per second. It just means the amount of damage avg'd out per second.

I'm in Gunpowder for Greek (about to advance), Arquebruisers have 28 dps to buildings with 1 less range. Bombards, the ballista of the age has 387 dps. That means a measly 5 extra archers (14 total) is enough to out-dps a bombard as well as stand a fighting chance against any sort of defenders. Great, let's go raze a town with 10 cannons because Quality > Quantity...But, well, the Quality can't defend itself.

95 troops -> 10 bombards vs 95 archers, the bombards surely have more dps by about 1k+ yes? Until a single horseman kills them all. You're not looking at the bigger picture. They have power in numbers against buildings AND defenders. It gets worse when tactics and supply troops happen.

Concerning your wall statement, you really don't think 8 shots from an army of supervised, virtually unkillable high-range archers is a lot? The only thing that would probably kill them is well-placed and upgraded defenses (mortar/castle shots)...But even then, the armor tactic and supply troops...And maybe even demo/sabo. Everything else can probably kill walls faster, you're right...But in no way is 70+ archers attacking a wall slow or inefficient considering the nature of archers.

Good to know that even HORSEMEN get some range in later ages.......Aside from that, I don't know why I mentioned that every class is ranged later. Probably just to fit the paragraph flow.

Maybe I got miniscule and barely relevant facts wrong, or typo'd. Whatever. The point is that archer raids are cheesy strategies and should not work the way they can. I'd honestly feel better about losing to well-done cannon raids.

 

[_Flash_]

If you weren't paying attention to that paragraph I mentioned the Cannon ranges in, the sentence before that I was talking about the British archers. So wouldn't you think I would be, you know, referring to the British archers? DPS does not mean shots per second. It just means the amount of damage avg'd out per second.

The problem was the statement that says "at farther ranges". Even British archers don't deal out damage at ranges farther than a cannon - they match the range of the cannons as the British archers.

You're not looking at the bigger picture. They have power in numbers against buildings AND defenders. It gets worse when tactics and supply troops happen.

The answer to mass archer attacks is splash damage. Sure, a single mortar doesn't cut them down, but, that's where designing kill zones, with getting troops in the crossfire of two mortars (without placing them right next to each other, so that a single sabotage can't disable them) come in.
Brand Marrow had initiated an excellent thread explaining the concept.
https://forum.nexonm.com/forum/nexon...ing-kill-zones

Aside from base design, it also helps to request for siege units (bombard/cannon/artillery/howitzer) as donated troops from allies in your alliance, prior to logging off from the game for an extended duration. Those units from TC deal additional splash damage, and are an additional layer of protection for your base, against possible mass archer raids.

Concerning your wall statement, you really don't think 8 shots from an army of supervised, virtually unkillable high-range archers is a lot? The only thing that would probably kill them is well-placed and upgraded defenses (mortar/castle shots)...But even then, the armor tactic and supply troops...And maybe even demo/sabo. Everything else can probably kill walls faster, you're right...But in no way is 70+ archers attacking a wall slow or inefficient considering the nature of archers.

8 shots is a lot of time - enough time for mortars to cause considerable damage, if the base is well designed. There's little that can be done if war tactics are brought into the mix, but, it's too time taking to train tactics for use in every attack in PvP. The power of war tactics is balanced by their long retraining time. Besides, with war tactics, most army compositions succeed, and so do mass archer attacks.

Maybe I got miniscule and barely relevant facts wrong, or typo'd. Whatever. The point is that archer raids are cheesy strategies and should not work the way they can. I'd honestly feel better about losing to well-done cannon raids.

It might be a good idea to re-examine the base design, and maybe, even take help from the community here to minimize the chances of archer raids succeeding against your base. Surely, with tactics thrown in, no base can hold itself up, but, that's true with most army compositions, and not just mass archer raids.
Beyond everything else, offense trumps defense in this game, and it's better kept that way, so, there's nothing that can be done beyond a point to defend successfully. It's best to go on the offense more than being on defense, and loot more resources that one loses.
I'm not a fan of mass archer armies either, and have never used them (I prefer a balanced army), but, what I don't agree with is that the archer unit is overpowered to require a nerf.

 

[Brand Marrow]

Congrats on your full bars _Flash_ , richly deserved.. (much more than some of these other full bar jokers....)

 

[_Flash_]

Thanks, Brand Marrow! Privileged to join your exclusive club! Thanks to all forum members for their support!

 

[Seenan]

The problem was the statement that says "at farther ranges". Even British archers don't deal out damage at ranges farther than a cannon - they match the range of the cannons as the British archers.



The answer to mass archer attacks is splash damage. Sure, a single mortar doesn't cut them down, but, that's where designing kill zones, with getting troops in the crossfire of two mortars (without placing them right next to each other, so that a single sabotage can't disable them) come in.
Brand Marrow had initiated an excellent thread explaining the concept.
https://forum.nexonm.com/forum/nexon...ing-kill-zones

Aside from base design, it also helps to request for siege units (bombard/cannon/artillery/howitzer) as donated troops from allies in your alliance, prior to logging off from the game for an extended duration. Those units from TC deal additional splash damage, and are an additional layer of protection for your base, against possible mass archer raids.


8 shots is a lot of time - enough time for mortars to cause considerable damage, if the base is well designed. There's little that can be done if war tactics are brought into the mix, but, it's too time taking to train tactics for use in every attack in PvP. The power of war tactics is balanced by their long retraining time. Besides, with war tactics, most army compositions succeed, and so do mass archer attacks.


It might be a good idea to re-examine the base design, and maybe, even take help from the community here to minimize the chances of archer raids succeeding against your base. Surely, with tactics thrown in, no base can hold itself up, but, that's true with most army compositions, and not just mass archer raids.
Beyond everything else, offense trumps defense in this game, and it's better kept that way, so, there's nothing that can be done beyond a point to defend successfully. It's best to go on the offense more than being on defense, and loot more resources that one loses.
I'm not a fan of mass archer armies either, and have never used them (I prefer a balanced army), but, what I don't agree with is that the archer unit is overpowered to require a nerf.

My base is ok, nearly no other raids besides cheesy archer raids are actually possibly getting a win. And very rarely the 4 star, if not 5. But this is practically every raid now. None of my mortars, and even some of my towers are able to get multi-sabotaged. I'm losing 4 medals to 13 horsemen and 40 archers, or variations of that, constantly by just a bit. It's rarely a quick victory, and rarely 4+ stars unless he's fully upgraded and coordinated with a smart army attacking my weak areas. Either there needs to be a buff to a troop that's supposed work as the skirmisher for buildings (Spearmen, maybe Factory infantry) or a nerf to archers. Both, if necessary. If EVERYONE is using an archer raid, or at least an archer raid to get a high spectrum of stars on my base, that's not a problem with my base since it can handle most other attacks (I don't have a big enough consensus since every kid is doing main unit archer raids). That's a problem with the balance of archers.

Let's put out an example...Let's say, championship series games in MOBAs. There's always a few select subset of champs that outrank the rest in versatility in, League Of Legends, for instance, and are either first pick or first banned. In terms of mobility, defenses, and offenses. That's basically archer raids (range esp with british, extra damage to defenders which allows for a strength in numbers scenario, and stronger with coordination, similar to a championship team of 5 players), since the only thing that can probably take care of them is one-shots with upgraded castles (but with enough of them, the castle probably wont be able to one hit them for long), maybe a general too, or mortars. Those are remedied with tactics and possibly supply trucks, so there's no downlow.

Defenders? Lol forget about it vs >30 archers that have bonus damage vs defenders... Towers? Dead very soon, especially if rallied on or with tactics. I do know there's at least one weakness to my base that people are noticing, but when they're STILL starring me on a stronger front, that's stupid to deal with.

I don't know what your full bars means exactly, but grats.

I encourage everyone reading this topic to stop spreading these annoying tactics on youtube or whatever. I do know a majority of people doing these raids come from clash of clans, where it's more possible and frequented to do archer raids due to an extensive troop capacity available (200+) and more TC levels/upgrades with weaker walls to work with.

EDIT: I just watched my recent loss from, you guessed it, an archer raid. The 13 horseman one I mentioned up there^. ANY of my horsemen that got close to the archers were decimated within 1 second of shooting, one after the other, and likely could only get one slash in. Granted, 2 of my towers for that front were being upgraded, but when 5k+ hp each of a horseman brigade dies within a second to archers, don't you think that's an issue? Upgrade them you say? Ok fine, 1.5 seconds. Spearmen you say? Dies in literally 2-3 hits. Those towers (archer tower and mortar) would've targetted the horsemen anyway, rather than the archers behind them. Like hell, I left COC because of all the casual cartoony crap and 2 week upgrade times, but now the COCers are bringing cheesy tactics here. This is literally the most basic COC tactic I'll often see attacking me.

UPDATE: I admittedly just lost a match to a balanced raid (not 600 archers and 3 horsemen) in the morning (10 hours+ ago). Though at least I don't really mind. If a person uses every unit on the board, tactics, and maybe even a General for a mild victory, that's respectable. They have to wait a collective hour+ before they can even do that again to anyone else, but hey, determination through noncheesy tactics. Maybe I'll reiterate my base with the added towers (I just reached the Enlightenment Age) when they're built...and maybe upgraded to reduce the chance of big losses (and small losses, I guess).

 

[Seenan]

Bumping this cause as I explore the forum for 'Tactics And Strategies', I see a lot of people describing British as a top-tier cause of overpowered/near-overpowered archers. If one range and, what is it, 20% damage(?) is enough to put archers over the edge, wouldn't you think that archers are flawed? The range breaks them, the damage is ok (when there's 90 archers shooting a horseman brigade) for defenders, but against buildings the damage should NOT be noticeably strong. In any case, a simple idea for this is to kill some of their damage or dps in general, and add a base damage+ for damage to defenders...Ie, slower attack speed archers and dps vs buildings at, let's say, Gunpowder tier minus ~15 dps, so 13-20 or so...but against defenders it adds +150 dps so they're still strong vs defenders but not against everything. Infact, when Fusiliers were able to attack over walls back then, they were nerfed practically instantly afterwards. Somehow archers are making it through.

My idea is probably too strong, numbers would prob need a tweak. Point is, if you change a civilization simply for archers being overpowered with no other decent civilization factors, probably means something's flawed. This is just like when everyone was spamming Japanese civilization cause of super strong Samurai dps, or Roman troops with an abundance of 500-600+ hp...or both. Never have I seen so many archer raids until I started playing again maybe a month ago.

 

[Sletteer1987]

Where I understand your frustration, this is like saying that French Tanks or another special unit needs Nerfing. Look at Germans now they can way overpower any base with the right strategy just like the British can it is all about how you play the game. This is the same way with the British, I have seen many British players do poorly it is all about your troop mix and strategy.

 

[Empire]

Where I understand your frustration, this is like saying that French Tanks or another special unit needs Nerfing. Look at Germans now they can way overpower any base with the right strategy just like the British can it is all about how you play the game. This is the same way with the British, I have seen many British players do poorly it is all about your troop mix and strategy.

Agree with Sletteer1987 No unit can win or lose battles/wars. Ultimately it's the composition and skill that helps more than anything else. The rest can only give you a boost where needed.

 

[_Flash_]

Agree with Sletteer1987 on this. Any nerf on the archers would adversely affect those who use balanced armies now, more than those who go for archer spam.

the only thing that can probably take care of them is one-shots with upgraded castles (but with enough of them, the castle probably wont be able to one hit them for long), maybe a general too, or mortars. Those are remedied with tactics and possibly supply trucks, so there's no downlow.

Defenders? Lol forget about it vs >30 archers that have bonus damage vs defenders... Towers? Dead very soon, especially if rallied on or with tactics.

when 5k+ hp each of a horseman brigade dies within a second to archers, don't you think that's an issue? Upgrade them you say? Ok fine, 1.5 seconds. Spearmen you say? Dies in literally 2-3 hits. Those towers (archer tower and mortar) would've targetted the horsemen anyway, rather than the archers behind them.

Castles, towers generals, horsemen, defenders are not the right ones to deal with ranged infantry. As I had already called out, it's splash damage. That comes from mortars and donated siege units at the town center. What's probably required here isn't a nerf, but a better understanding of the game, and what's the right counter for what. Expecting defenses which weren't designed to deal with ranged infantry to be effective against them is an exercise in futility, which can only lead to frustration.

Infact, when Fusiliers were able to attack over walls back then, they were nerfed practically instantly afterwards.

Sure, they were nerfed, but, that didn't help in any way towards bringing balance to the units. It practically rendered the unit useless, and most people stopped using them thereafter.
We've had too many nerfings in this game. It's time to put an end to nerfings.

 

[Seenan]

Agree with Sletteer1987 on this. Any nerf on the archers would adversely affect those who use balanced armies now, more than those who go for archer spam.



Castles, towers generals, horsemen, defenders are not the right ones to deal with ranged infantry. As I had already called out, it's splash damage. That comes from mortars and donated siege units at the town center. What's probably required here isn't a nerf, but a better understanding of the game, and what's the right counter for what. Expecting defenses which weren't designed to deal with ranged infantry to be effective against them is an exercise in futility, which can only lead to frustration.


Sure, they were nerfed, but, that didn't help in any way towards bringing balance to the units. It practically rendered the unit useless, and most people stopped using them thereafter.
We've had too many nerfings in this game. It's time to put an end to nerfings.

In that case, why doesn't Nexon rebuff Fusiliers/onward so that archers don't just supersede them at any opportunity? From a medieval war perspective, archers can shoot arrows high into the air to pass walls, but since everyone uses guns now, that can't happen...But archers still are able to, while Fusiliers get the short-end of the stick being unable to. It would vastly help if the AIs were upgraded aswell to not derp and attack a wall when there's a clear-cut opening a square beside them (exaggeration).

 

[_Flash_]

A buff to the Fusilier line of troops is much needed. It'll definitely bring in some balance to the use of troops.
Any and every improvement to the troop AI is a much needed and a welcome improvement!

 

[Penambangliar]

If you can’t beat them, join them or ask nexon to release one nation only.

 

[Ravenlord]

Horsemen don't become ranged in the sense that they can't shoot over walls. They just gain the ability to shoot.

Tanks get a range of 3, as do fusiliers and raiders who get a range of 1.5. None of these units can shoot over walls. So, the statement in the post saying "But since everything is basically ranged except Horsemen later on" is inaccurate, which is what I've pointed out

Okay, but it can be misconstrued.

You two argue just like a married couple !!!