You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Strategy and General Discussion
Moderated by Yeebaagooon, TAG

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.5 replies
Age of Mythology Heaven » Forums » Strategy and General Discussion » Top 5 archer major gods
Bottom
Topic Subject:Top 5 archer major gods
Draco_Wolfgand
Mortal
posted 02 May 2018 06:08 PM EDT (US)         
So, to keep this list intersting, let us set some ground rules, right? First of all: Only one major god per civilization allowed. That way, we make sure every civilization gets representation. Secound of all: For the purpose of "archers", I mean any unit that takes bonus damage from the Peltast, what, yes, does means the Throwing Axeman will be technically considered a archer for the purposes of this list. However, heroes and myth units that technically operate as archers( Like, say, the Centaur or some Greek heroes ) but take no bonus damage from anti-archer units will not be considered. Also, bonuses, myth technologies, or even units that dont directly affect archers/arent archers might be considered, but only in how they support their archers With that said, lets get started:

#1: Hades.

It should be quite obvious to anyone who ever played Hades( Or even, well... Read his bonuses ) why he is the best amongst the Greeks. As for the best in general: Let me see... With his bonus and all the myth upgrades, the Toxotes becomes potentially both one of the hardest-hitting archers and one of the most cost effective archers in the game, they have the Gastraphetes which is one of the longest ranged archers in the game which, again, can potentially prove to hit quite hard and can also operate as a pseudo-siege unit, and access to actually quite powerfull infantry and a host of bulky myth units to act as support for their archers. Yeah, seems good enough. Compared to other Major Gods on this list, the only thing Hades lacks, is mobility, but honestly it simply has enough raw power to make up for it.

#2: Nu Wa.

The Mounted Archer is by itself a intersting unit. It is a anti-cavalry archer, and the only one of its kind. It also has very high speed which lets it defeat most infantry units as well through sheer abusal of hit-and-run tactics, and it can actually in many ways operate sort of like a Chariot Archer( Itself a fearsome unit ) that can also kill cavalry units. It is probably the star of the Chinese where it comes to archers( Remembering that the Fire Lance is technically not considered a "archer" for the purposes of this list ). Needless to say, Nu Wa has obviously the best Mounted Archers of the Chinese in virtue of her bonus and her having access to both Chongli and Shennong upgrades, and she can also use Cho Ko Nu just as well if the situation calls for it.

However, although the Mounted Archer is powerfull and versatile, it is actually significantly inferior to Hades Toxotes when used in "standart" archer roles, as in, to provide cover fire for infantry. It is similarly inferior to the Chariot Archer in equal number battles, although it demands less population slots and, with Nu Wa upgrades, costs less, what actually makes her Mounted Archers comparable to Chariot Archers in this regard. It will not always be able to take advantage of its speed in battle either, as hit-and-run tactics can be a bad idea when, let us say, it is your base that is under attack. It also has this bizarre weakness to anti-cavalry-cavalry, in virtue of technically being treated as both a archer and a cavalry unit So, while Nu Wa Mounted Archer can take roles that Hades Toxotes cannot, I still prefer Hades Toxotes.

#3: Ra.

The Chariot Archer is already considered one of the best archers in the game as is: Fast, hard-hitting, and surprisingly bulky. The Egyptian Camelry/Chariot Archer combination is a classic, and of course, nobody pulls it quite as Ra does. Yeah, Yeah, Set is technically a bit better on the Slinger cathegory, but... Who cares ? The Chariot Archer is much more powerfull and versatile anyway. Although, the Mounted Archer is kind of already a walking "Camelry/Chariot Archer" combination... But then again, Ra can easily destroy Mounted Archer based tactics in virtue of both of its favourite countering it. Honestly, now that I think of it, I probably would have put him and Nu Wa higher on and Hades in the #3 spot if it wasnt for the fact that I prefer Hades more "direct" approach. Also, Ra archers are only anything to brag about on the Heroic Age onwards, whereas the two civilizations above him both have something going for then even already on the Classical Age.

#4: Uranus.

I really wished I didnt had to rank Uranus so low, because I actually really like Atlantis archers. The Arcus is basically a Gastraphetes minus the bonus damage against buildings BUT occupiyng only two populations slots, and the Turma is basically a anti-archer archer that can, circunstnacially, be used against infantry through sheer abusal of hit-and-run tactics. Alas, Atlantis archers dont pack as much of a punch as Hades does( Even if they might be better then Zeus and Poseidon archers ), and the Turma is arguably the weakest one of the "mounted archer" triad of Chariot Archer and Mounted Archer( Even if it ironically counter both the Chariot Archer, the Mounted Archer, and Hades Toxotes ). So, Atlantis lack of many myth upgrades or considerable god bonuses for their archers makes then actually kind of on the average, better then the ones of gods with weak archers, but worst then the ones of specialized archer gods. As for why I chose Uranus: Well, you see... Nobody cares about Mail of Orichalkos( No offense about Rheia who actually is a good goddess, it is just this specific tech that is useless ) anyway, and between having the hero upgrades and its speed speeds, Uranus Turmas are exceptionally good at using hit-and-run tactics, especially against myth units after being turned into heroes.

#5: Thor.

I mean, of course that the Norse would have the worst archers in the game. I already had to give then extra credit and pretend the Throwing Axeman is a archer . And, although it is good for what it is suppose to do( Killing infantry ), it is on this awkward spot where it is somehow weak both to the typical counters to infantry AND the typical counters to archers( With the exception of Huskarls, They kill Huskarls quite well ). So even if it was a archer, it would still be nad.

Still, Thor Throwing Axeman are technically the best of the Norse, thanks to the extra armory upgrades, as well as access to Skadi tech. Still... Not exactly bragging material here, buddy.
AuthorReplies:
Legendary Raider
Mortal
(id: avaget)
posted 03 May 2018 02:26 PM EDT (US)     1 / 5       
you should consider ballista for norse, while being slow to produce, slow, having a minimal range and being siege - per pop and damage output it is the best unit with pierce attack (when you consider the damage is multiplied by 4 bolts and has a splash coverage)

odin deserves a consideration (more hp on ballista)
Izalith
Mortal
(id: Lilitu)
posted 03 May 2018 04:36 PM EDT (US)     2 / 5       
Saying the Arcus is basically a Toxotes with +5 Range is closer than saying it's a Gastraphetes minus the Building Damage, Cost and Pop Cost.. especially since that would compare the basic archers and not some specialized building killer, but well, it's neither of those.

Pls don't refer to gods as "it", they have feelings too. And children. :P

Azarath Metrion Zinthos

Steam: Order of Azarath
Twitch: twitch.tv/orderofazarath
Discord: Azarath @ https://discord.gg/3ENKJeb
Draco_Wolfgand
Mortal
posted 03 May 2018 09:33 PM EDT (US)     3 / 5       
The thing is, I dont actually think of the Gastraphetes as a "specialized building killer"? It is still great against infantry and, with Monster Slayers, it can prove a viable counter to certain myth units( Namelly the slower, meele ones like the Mountain Giant ). This is probably a unpopular opinion, but I find it to be somewhat usefull even against other archers, as the superior range lets it get a volley or two off before the enemies get the chance to counter, thus thinning out their numbers. I guess I understand that it was still a oversimplification, though.

But anyway, I was just saiyng, I find Arcus to be a great archer, since it has one of the biggest advantages of the Gastraphetes in my eyes( The sheer range ), while lacking the main thing that holds it back when compared to the Toxotes( Population cost. ) Also, if I were to include the Norse Ballista, then to keep things fair, I would also have to include Atlantis Cheiroballistas, so...

[This message has been edited by Draco_Wolfgand (edited 05-03-2018 @ 09:34 PM).]

Legendary Raider
Mortal
(id: avaget)
posted 04 May 2018 05:04 AM EDT (US)     4 / 5       
ah.. but a cherioballista is a narrow-use counter unit, regular ballista has the damage to be effective against any type of a unit.

out of 4 ballista bolts only 2 needs to hit to deal more damage than fu hades toxotes.
cherioballista hitting all 4 bolts still deals less damage per pop than a hades fu toxotes vs non-infantry.

unupgraded ballista deals x2 amount of damage to non-infantry per pop and has +10 more range than fu cherioballista
eine_Gurkensalat
Mortal
(id: eine_gurkensalad)
posted 06 May 2018 11:21 AM EDT (US)     5 / 5       
Gastraphetes lose against any unit (even hypaspists I think, though it will need a test*) if they aren't protected and if you fight at equal cost... just like any true siege weapons

They do have a good efficiency against buildings, with about 30 attack against buildings with hephaestus, so if you see the cost it's really in the same order of magnitude than a catapult (which can't be considered as a bad siege weapon...)

if you use them as an archer, you should remember that it can't be cost efficient if they are attacked, i'll prefer regular archers in most cases except if you have plenty of tower from where gastraphates are protected (this combination is awesome !).

It's a lure to think that you will protect them in a battle, because you can lost them or lost your army to protect them and the result would be very bad in both cases.

as for your top, you really forgot the train points and the slinger for set, as the game doesn't begin age 3...
And with seth you will be enclain to reach age 3 with Sekhmet because it correspond to his strat, while with ra the tentation is big to pass with Hathor which is a very good god.

*I did the test and hypaspists does destroy horribly gastraphetes at equal cost, even if i make very numerous armies (you know that archers are supposed to be much better in great armies)
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Age of Mythology Heaven | HeavenGames