I don’t know how old this graphic is; but what’s funny is how everyone ignore the evidence and simply present their personal perspective??
WHY HAVEN’T YOU ALL INTERACTED WITH THE GRAPHIC? Care to explain how the most made unit in the game isn’t the 1st or 2nd or 3rd most killed unit??? could it be archers last muuuchhh longer alive than the other units??
Simple, front line dies first.
Just not true, you can kill archers with equal resources of horsemen.
if frontline dies first then you just supported my argument that the archer is super duper effective given they are woefully untouched?? and still the MOST unit made? So all those units in the back that aren’t dying and are the largest mass might be a problem no?
How do you suppose you kill the most made unit in the game?? Let me guess make more frontline units?? Still you’re refusing to interact with the complete stat? WHY are the archers the most made unit??
I wanted to write same thing
This mechanic is already in the game, in the SP campaign, it works like this
for an unknown reason, the developers irrationaly decided to remove it from the main game
In your Elo it is surely like that
What is your Elo/League ?
Why can Beasty play a full match with zero ranged unit and zero archery range and win? Even in Imperial age?
If archers were so strong he would have made archers instead of horsemen and spears the whole game.
The french opponent was mostly using Knights and Archers. Why didn’t he stop making knight to make only archers? If they are so good against spear + horse.
Check this video will probably change your mind on archers.
The front line dies first because they are at the front so they are targeted first, not because they are weaker. Also this is the stat across all elo so there may be some lower levels that struggle against archers with bad micro (for example if you don’t know how to Attack move archers will have a huge advantage).
The other reason is that there are many melee alternatives in feudal (spear, horse, sometimes maa or knights) but only archers most of the time as a ranged unit. So more people make them as they go archer + spear or archer + horse or archer + maa are common combinasons.
You have to consider the other advantages:
Spear → Can destroy buildings, have the biggest counter bonus damage.
Horse → Can raid and move fast, can chose which engagement they take, can also destroy buildings
Archer → Good in masses or when there are obstacles, but bad against building and slow. Can’t destroy outpost and wood walls.
And that statistic will count English longbows.
If the player is still in the Feudal Age and is facing a mass of 70 archers and 20 spears, he has not done something right.
You took a game not only using a civ that has bonus for mainly using melee units but took the 2nd best player playing an inferior opponent? To draw a general conclusion that archer’s ARE NOT overperformancing???
BUT you refuse to consider the tournament performances of relatively similar competitors using heavily range base composition? The only exceptions tournament wise were Ottomans?
So you think he chose to use worse units just because he was playing against a slightly inferior opponent (still in top 15). No, he was using the best units for this matchup… And yes melee civ will go more melee and range civ will go more range. Just shows that both are viable.
At this point you just want to argue as you’re also ignoring all the advantages of other units i mentioned.
Watch his stream and you’ll see exactly what he was up to.
Also never did i ever say melee was weak??? I said range mass needs nerf bc how mass overperformance even against cav? Stay on topic plz
He wanted to try meinworks, beasty religiously says in his stream how he hates meinworks and how archan chapel is mandatory?
How does a video showing 2nd best player using HRE… the infantry mele civ?? Proves anything for or against range unit needed a nerf or not?
Can you please defend your point by showing a mass of semi protected range units being deleted by a comparable cav mass?
You’re all over the place.
Trying meinworks doesn’t mean you have to play with no range units even in imperial.
But why did he reach castle first? Because he had to spend less on army? Because the spear + horsemen beat his archers?
Of course your game of players of different levels is your irrefutable evidence.
I think moving the archer’s base damage towards his bonus damage is the most practical thing to balance this once and for all.
ok, another big nerf for england. One question, why are mongols, ottomans, rus, malians and french at the top and not england?
I mean the 5 civs are the “cav” civs or not?
So how would you compensate this nerf for example english?
More than 48% winrate is not a problem, we are not in Alice and the Wonderland world!!
and thats your answer? really?
oh yea but we need a archer change 
