Like in campaign archers should cost 50 food and 30 woods.
And longbowman should be 60 food and 30 woods.
Archers drains woods too fast so no woods remain
I know the reason why they made archers to cost 50 woods because they don’t wanted archer spammers to both have archers and siege units at the same time.
Efficient lumberjacks are the key to keeping the wood supply steady; that, and not building anything without necessity.
There are a ton of idiosyncrasies where the campaign is different from multiplayer - e.g. the hot keys are different.
That said, I think archer pricing is good at the moment.
English is not really strong , if you nerf the longbow men by changing the price the civ will be unplayable
I feel like English are average, I mean… If one can nail down the longbow rush you will have at least an 1000 elo.
But to answer your question… If I recall correctly archers cost 80 resources same as spearmen, but with the weight put on wood rather then food. Its to force players to make resource gathering choices and to give opponents ways to predict those choices.
Needless to say longbows are slightly more expensive again because they are significantly better then both.
Whatever any change may balances the game the other way around espically when you are dealing with non AI opponents. Though I never played with rts games in a multiplayer mode