Exactly, the Godi is not a Peltast, but what other long-range unit can you use to try to counter an archer spam? The Norse should have a long-range unit to counter long-range archers, but unfortunately there is no long-range military unit that does that.
Ballista has 30 range and high pierce damage.
/Thread
But the Ballista is not a military unit, the ballista is a siege unit like the catapult, therefore it is slow and expensive, it would not make sense to spam ballista because the economy would be greatly affected.
Ballista, Draugr, Troll, Firegiant.
Use Battleboar to distract enemy.
Valkyrie to heal your melee units.
WAIT…
What is it you want?
- Are you saying you want Archers like Bogsveigr to return?
- Are you asking a question? like, how do i counter archers?
There you are wrong. Myth Units and Buildings have way less crush damage. If you want to fight though myth units from a distance you can use siege like Ballista, Catapult, Petrobolos, Siege Crossbow.
If you want to beat a big group of units that do pierce damage, you can use the melee-siege-units like Rams, Siegetowers, Helepolis, Firesiphon and Axecart to tank the damage. For example Axecart has 90% pierce damage.
If someone is going full archers then bring in an axecart or portableram and suddenly they have a hard time dealing with that. So your soldiers can fight the archers in closecombat.
2 Likes
They want the raiding ballista. 30 range and 6 speed 
2 Likes
While we’re on this topic, I’d like to ask other players how they feel about the effectiveness of Ballistas against non-building units (primarily infantry). I’m asking because Ballistas have high pierce damage compared to other siege weapons, so in theory they could be useful at least against infantry, and I’ve had this question for a while.
The Norse need a long-range military unit that can be used to counter long-range archer spam. I’m not referring to a melee military unit, nor a mythical unit, nor a siege unit.
Are you trolling right now? You set up a scenario specifically so that the Norse lose (cavalry perfectly lined up against katapeltes, infantry lined up against fanatics) and then act indignant that the Norse don’t win?
4 Likes
Again you act surprised that a scenario designed for the Norse to lose results in a Norse loss? The cheiroballista is literally designed to counter infantry. It’s one of the hardest counters in the game.
1 Like
EVEN SURROUNDING THE ENEMY’S ARCHERS WITH HUSKARL, RAIDING CAVALRY, HEROES, BERSERK AND WITH MORE UNITS THAN THE ENEMY THE NORSE ALWAYS LOSES.
Yelling doesn’t make your poor reasoning any better.
If you can’t even be bothered setting up scenarios that genuinely demonstrate the point you’re trying to make (the fact that the scenario we’re shown clearly does not match the scenario you’re yelling about indicates you must know you’re being dishonest), I’m not sure what responses you want to see. You’ve had a lot of good suggestions in this thread from people earnestly trying to help. Maybe you should respond in kind, instead of dismissing people’s advice out of hand.
5 Likes
the only responses users send here are to use huskarl + raiding cavalry to counter archers, and that doesn’t even work to counter archers. Moreover, huskarl + raiding cavalry are useless units to counter archers unless you’re facing novice opponents who send archers without units to defend them. I already uploaded a video where I surrounded Greek archers with huskarl + raiding cavalry + other units, and the Norse always lose.
1 Like
Although I do agree that these scenarios are off and should be changed, This doesn’t change the fact that there is an inherent design flaw within most RTSes now days. The fact that the player experience can change so much depending on his/her skill should be tuned down a tad bit.
Now most people pointed out what are the problems with your scenarios I will just summarize them:
first video: Unit combination is wrong, Cavalries didn’t flank.
second video: Unit combination is wrong, Cavalries didn’t flank.
third video: The resources spent by atlantean is way higher than norse army.
fourth video: (Which is intresting) You don’t need that much Hersirs against an army that has no myth units, You need a lot more Throwing axemen, You don’t need that much huskarls here cause there are alot of anti infantry units here replacing huskarls with raiding cavaly would be better, Although berserks are great generalist units the combination of this particular greek army renders them useless better stop making them at all. BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, this greek combi effectively gets countered very nicely just by two types of units: Jarls and Throwing axemen.
2 Likes
Norse has a key unit that should be used in pretty much every scenario and vs any match up. That unit is the throwing axeman. If you had throwing axemen in this scenario instead of hersirs the outcome of that battle would have been very different.
The throwing axeman solves the problem riding cavalry has towards getting to back line archers. They will make short work of every other infantry type, so you should always build them up.
I have been watching this thread and it really is mostly a l2p issue (I use this term rarely). Norse is a very special civilization that’s unlike pretty much anything from any other RTS (There is no equivalent to them in any age of empires game and in other RTS as well), so they are somewhat harder to grasp. Norse have been dominating this game since release, they surely don;t need a dedicated archer.
The topic of this post is: It’s unfair that all pantheons have long-range archers except the Norse.
-
The Norse do not have long-range military units useful for countering archer spam; they only have melee units that are useless for countering archers.
-
It’s not a solution to use melee units to counter archer spam; Huskarl + Raiding Cavalry is not the solution because they are weak against other melee units. (opponent archers always have melee units defending them)
-
It’s not a solution to use ballista because they are slow and expensive siege units.
-
It’s not a solution to use Throwing Axemen against archers because they are short-range units that are not effective against archers, according to https://ageofempires.fandom.com/wiki. The Throwing Axeman was only designed to counter melee military units. “Throwing Axeman are low hitpoint units with short attack range. Throwing Axeman are very weak against archer spam.”
-
It’s not a solution to use godi against archers because they are slow units that are not effective against archers. The godi was only designed to counter flying mythical units, according to: https://ageofempires.fandom.com/wiki
-
The Norse need an efficient long-range military unit to counter archer spam. This way, all pantheons would have long-range units to counter long-range archers, which would be the fairest for everyone.
I would like the Skjaldmær to be a new Norse long-range military unit effective only against archers.
Skjaldmær:
1 Like
Yes, make every Pantheon the same. Who wants asymmetrical factions, right?
As others have explained again and again, Norse have ways to deal with archers. If you do not like the tools Norse have to deal with archers play another Pantheon.
4 Likes
That is not a solution to the problem. The way to counter the archers that you mention is unfair because all pantheons have long-range military units to counter archers except the Norse
Arguing is stronger than me D:
1 Like
If it was unfair then the Norse would lose all the time, right?
But for some reason they have been leading in the stats for months.
Maybe you need to accept that the game is not designed according to your personal skill level.
The Atlanteans were never OP just because you personally struggled against them.
The Norse aren’t bad against archers just because you personally don’t know what unit composition to use.
6 Likes