Why are there people training Archers as Vikings?

I’m more into Berserks and other infantry units (Berserker regeneration, infantry extra HP, and bonus against cavalry are sweet)…and I did not expect to see Viking rivals make archers.

Archers have always been the standard play for Vikings. Archers are a lot better than infantry typically, and Vikings have a great eco bonus, which makes archers work even better. Until a few months ago, they also had fully upgraded Arbalests, now they only miss Thumb Ring, but it’s still a great opening.


especially if you go infantry your opponent will usually go archers, since archers counter infantry.
but also in general archers are a good idea as vikings

Archers are cheaper, easier to mass, easier to keep alive.

1 Like

Because archers are easy on the economy and are much more stronger than infantry.
Vikings’ Knights suck and can’t be trained from feudal on.

Even Japanese and Malians usually go archers, despite the good infantry.


If stone inventory weren’t a problen, aren’t Berserks and extra-HP with chieftain infantry not good enough for them?

But that’s not really a question - if Castles were easy to spam everywhere, we’d see Unique Units more, sure.

However, you can still only build Castles in Castle Age, whereas you can start massing Archers from Feudal Age. Infantry generally are too weak right now to be your main composition, therefore many Infantry civs open with something else (and likely in many match-ups don’t tech into Infantry anyway).

Fully upgraded Berserkers are one of the (if not the most) expensive units to get, and getting to that point is a struggle if you just do Infantry. You’ll just die to anything that counters Infantry, which usually is many.

How long have you been playing? How many pro games do you watch?