Ctrl-H included, just curious to see where everyone stands on the matter. I usually do nowadays but I miss the old days of the Warband grind. View Poll submitted by /u/Tokarev490 [link] [comments]
Ranged efficiency: In LionExodus's ranged efficiency test, Imperial crossbowmen ranked 7rd and vlandian crossbowmen ranked 6rd.
Crossbows can deal more damage per shot than bows however they also fire slower so the overall DPS (damage per second) is way lower when compared to bows. They also have way less ammo (20 bolts while most archers have 60-64 arrows)
No, crossbowmen are NOT more effective than bows even against troops with heavy armor.
Yes, they do have a 15% extra range when compared to fians but keep it doesn't justify having almost 4x less amo and less DPS.
Melee efficiency :
In LionExodus's melee efficiency test, sharpshooter ranked 4rd among ranged troops and imperial crossbowmen ranked 3rd
Every month a random website just lists the sharpshooter in a top 10 list and they claim things such as "they are as good as any other infantrymen in melee" which is not really true at all. As you can see, not only they are bad against other t5 infantry but also not the best ranged troops at melee.
Their weapons are really bad (Way too long, deals low damage) and their armor isn't that good either. They do have a shield but keep in mind that if your archers need to fight at close range it means that either the infantry has caught up to them or the cavalry has flanked them. in both cases a shield would be useless so it doesn't really matter.
TLDR: I've seen many people in this sub saying that vlandian crossbowmen are the second best troop in the game and the best one at melee just because they have a shield which is not true at all.
They are not the best at melee and not even top 5 at ranged efficiency. Don't use this troop unless you are roleplaying. Definitely the most overrated troops in the game.
[link] [comments]
Comments
Post a Comment