It is currently Tue Oct 15, 2019 11:35 am



Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 
 Isn't it better to keep only archers to defend the castles? 
Author Message

Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 6:32 pm
Posts: 8
Reply with quote
Post Isn't it better to keep only archers to defend the castles?
This is one of my castle. There are 395 archers and 5 captains for the defense.

https://gyazo.com/3551673fca920ebaba13f6a123d69eaf

My Liege Lord told me to put pikemen in the middle. That means I may reduce around 50 archers and put 50 pikemen instead. As his and my languages are different, its bit hard to communicate.

So let me explain my view on this,

Only archers can fight against Long ranged catapults. Only archers can fight against other archers. And archers are much better against pikemen and swordsmen. If enemy player uses captain's archer volley tactics, still this setup can't kill all the archers, and that tactics also similar affect for the pikemen.

My question is, why archers alone can't defend the castle better than pikemen?


Fri Mar 01, 2019 10:58 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 5:00 pm
Posts: 160
Location: Don't stalk me pls
Reply with quote
Post Re: Isn't it better to keep only archers to defend the castl
Hello Yasojith :)

Good question.

The thing is, when a real player attacks you and wants to capture / raze your village, you absolutely will need pikes.

Remember, to win an attack, the attacker has to reach your keep. The attacker will only have to break the castle walls, dig through the moat, and kill 5 units in your keep. That's 3/4 attacks.

If you add more pikes, you will get an extra layer of defense.

In wars, I always try to have at least 100 pikes in my castles. The way to do this is the following: the pikes IN and IN FRONT OF the keep (+-15 / 20) are on defensive mode (green shield icon) the rest are on aggressive mode (red sword icon).

I have several reports where I can show you how it saved my village :) If you would like to see them, come to the Europe 5 map and send me a mail there. I will forward them :)

_________________
Join me on Europe 5 or China 1
Scream to the devil that God is good


Fri Mar 01, 2019 5:36 pm
Profile

Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 6:32 pm
Posts: 8
Reply with quote
Post Re: Isn't it better to keep only archers to defend the castl
Greetings King Phillip II, thank you for the reply.

I just like to have bit further enlightenment on this matter. If I add 100 pikemen, then I have to reduce 100 archers. Isnt that make more vulnerable against catapult attacks?

And what I was thinking is, pikemen will fight only if the player reach at the center after digging the moat, but archers always fight with those enemy troops beyond the castle walls.

I'm not much familiar with PvP combat, so any advice is welcome in this matter.


Fri Mar 01, 2019 6:31 pm
Profile

Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 3:58 pm
Posts: 94
Reply with quote
Post Re: Isn't it better to keep only archers to defend the castl
When a player comes for your castle their last attack will not have catapults and this is when you will need pikes. To capture a players castle you need to get troops into the keep itself. To do this the player will send multiple attacks the first few with many catapults but the final blow will be mostly pikes and archers as they tried to force there way into your keep. By surrounding your keep with pikes these last attacks will have to fight there way through your troops.

With an all archer defense, once they have drilled through your walls to your keep you will have no defense left other than the few captains in the keep. Their last attack will quickly over whelm these captains either with an archer volley or by the large ground force that they attacker will send against your keep.


Fri Mar 01, 2019 7:06 pm
Profile
Online

Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2012 4:18 pm
Posts: 987
Reply with quote
Post Re: Isn't it better to keep only archers to defend the castl
There is no defense against a committed player in SHK unless you are online at the time of the attacks.

While it is true that you can capture a castle defended my 400 archers with fewer attack waves than a castle with 350 Archers / 50 Pikemen or 300 Archers / 100 Pikemen, as a committed attacker I am willing to send more attacking armies than are needed.

400 archers is just fine against AI attacks.

In a war against committed opponents it is not going to matter much if you are not online. I can do 5 breakers and 2 captain attacks as well as 4 breakers and 1 captain attack.

- Deke


Fri Mar 01, 2019 8:41 pm
Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 6:36 am
Posts: 21
Reply with quote
Post Re: Isn't it better to keep only archers to defend the castl
More experienced players will use full attacks with their captain armies, even 100 pikemen is not enough for a proper defense.


How the pikemen are placed and how many will determine how many attacks you can defend. Some castles can defend better with 150 archers and 350 pikes than a castle with 600 archers. All depends on if you know what you are doing.


Sat Mar 02, 2019 3:58 am
Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 6:36 am
Posts: 21
Reply with quote
Post Re: Isn't it better to keep only archers to defend the castl
That being said 5 captains in the keep is a massive waste of gold. One captain army will archer clear that entire keep. The ones who are placed in the middle are usually the first to die.


Sat Mar 02, 2019 4:00 am
Profile

Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2015 6:06 pm
Posts: 109
Reply with quote
Post Re: Isn't it better to keep only archers to defend the castl
I like to think of the Pikemen in the center of the castle as a way to delay the inevitable. They are much tougher than archers so it takes longer to kill them, buying time for the archers to decimate the attacking army.

The truth is that oil pots are actually a better defense against player attacks than archers in most cases.

A determined attacker will simply send a few waves of archer clears, usually from a parish or capitol, against a castle so it doesn't even cost them any honor.

Once a side is clear, then they send in waves of catapults on a pillage attack to break down the towers without losing too many catapult, followed by ( if needed )an oil clear and then by captain armies to raze or capture the village.

Most of the more experienced players will time their attacks to hit a village only a second or two apart, so you really wont have any time to do anything about the results of the attacks until after they all land.

IF an attacker doesn't have enough resources to raze a village on their own, then they will just have a few of their friends "time in" with them. Participation in these types of attacks is always a lot of fun and is what many player look forward too in a war.


Also don't waste your captains on defense like that, the attacking armies captains tactics will just clear them out before their pikes or swordsmen get there.

If you have an LL who has stationed troops at your castle, a better strategy is to play a barracks card and place all of the LL troops. Then use your captains and any of your own unplaced troops to make a counter attack against an attacking village.

If you can raze an attacking players village before their attack lands, then that villages army will never hit you, it will simply disappear.


Sat Mar 02, 2019 6:44 am
Profile

Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 6:32 pm
Posts: 8
Reply with quote
Post Re: Isn't it better to keep only archers to defend the castl
Thank you very much for all the answers.


Sun Mar 03, 2019 6:58 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 9 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.