Tagawa Archers vs. Roman Archers

[1moreheroscaper]

Every time a new Wave is released I look at how the stats and special compare to previous units. Since my bulk order of Wave 6 arrived from Funagaingames on Thursday 12/14, I have had time to consider the Tagawa archers more carefully.

Quick side note about my order: Sandra, I'm sorry I didn't order with you this time, but I wanted to get mulitple of the commons which was not a pre-order option through your site. I still support you, I ordered from you back before you went exclusive with HS, actually I informed you on how to tell what a Uniqe/Heroes pack was compared to a common pack.

Back to the Tagawa Archers. I appears to me that the Tagawa Archers will replace the Roman archers for most small battles for players the choose an Einar themed army. The Tagawa Archers move 1 more space, they can get a boost from Hamoto, and they have a high defense value for a common range unit. The Romans on the other hand have the Arrow Volley, but the move 4, they have 1 defense, and the currently receive no specific bonus from an Einar Hero. Does this really account for 10 point difference between the two units?

It doesn't feel right when we have new common units that appear to make previous common units, of the same-class, obsolete in a. I don't know, maybe 70 points would have been better for the Tagawa Archers. I have not come to my final conclusion--I need to play with the units more. I guess only Battle-time will tell.

-1moreheroscaper

[AmishBurrito]

The roman archers are very versatile with their choice of attacks. They can go anti squad with three separate attacks base 2, or they can attack a hero with a 6A special attack. Special attacks are important to negate things like Tough, Smoke Bomb, Ninja's Dissappear, etc.

[Uprising]

When playing themed armies, you're still gonna want to use the Romans with the Romans and the TSA(Tagawa Samurai Archers) with the Samurai. However, in a different scenario, not defined by theme or General, I think the Roman Archers would get replaced. That 1 defense doesn't go very far at all. It's hard to keep them alive when trying to get off Arrow Volley. I'm a strong advocate of the TSAs. They may not have glitz and pazzaz, but they are a solid squad that'll make someone think twice about rushing them.

[Tiberius]

Is it only a +one defense? I thought the new archers had a three defense and counterstrike instead of a 2 defense and counterstrike. If they only have 2 defense, i would still stick with the roman archers for the special.

[CupidsArt]

I like the Romans but I see myself using the Tagawa most oftwn (and I'd like it to be said that I really won't run either that often, I'm an Elf guy)

[nickmodaily]

I don't think that the Roman Archers will be replaced for a couple of reasons:

1) Pointwise they work better with a Roman themed army. You can draft two squads of them along with Parmenio or Ne-Gok-Sa for an even 200 points.

2)They are better against high defense heroes. While they may not get picked in pre-made armies, they are a solid choice for a draft if your opponent has selected a lot of melee heroes (Viking Heroes, Denrick, Ne-Gok-Sa, Ork Heroes, Drake, Major X17, etc.)

3) While it seems that the Samurai are stronger, their counterstrike looses it's potency against figures with Special Attacks, Stealth Flying, and Disengage. So, if your opponent drafts figures with these abilities, you may want to reconsider drafting the Samurai Archers.

I don't think that one squad is better than another, just that each one has its place in an army and they can both be useful in different ways.

[NecroBlade]

I don't think they make the Romans obsolete, but I voted for the Samurai, because they're samurai, and they have better survivability (yes, it is +2 defence, not +1).

[Chimpy]

I think the Romans will be used a lot less. But, in certain scenarios like castle sieges, the Romans will be favored. I would rather have 2 Romans on top of a castle than 2 samurai units up there.

Counterstrike would be next to useless up on the castle and the extra movement doesn’t do much good.

The Romans fare much better. They will all be on the same level, there defense will get a boost that makes them pretty sturdy and they are cheaper.

[countblah]

I think the Romans are actually more versatile and useful than the samurai archers, who don't really have too much going on.

[spider_poison]

I don't think either of them are made obsolete. In my mind, it's like saying "Have the zombies made the Warriors of Ashra obsolete"? I think they're just too different to look at it that way.

[Hahma]

I think where the Samurai archers will be better is when they are with the Einar Flagbearer because he gives them better defense with the Einar symbol = shield, thus their counterstrike is better as well. Their defense is already at 3 which is 2 better than the Romans and 1 better than the Aubriens. Put them on a castle and their defense really helps their staying power. Plus they get 1 extra move is nice too.

That said, if you don't have the flagbearer or don't want to spend the points in drafting him, then the Roman archers are nice because of their arrow volley and lower cost. The special attack lets them affect some units that can only be affected with specials.

I like to play themed or general specific armies sometimes and I like having the extra option with Einar getting more archers. I don't expect too much from archers anyway.

[Hendal]

Do the tagawa archers come with 2 or 3 in the squad, from the picture on the home page I can't tell?????

I have never liked the roman archers, the 1 defense bothers me, they are slow, and I have always thought 2 should be able to do a special volley of 4 attack.
I will be trying the tagawa archers more then I ever did the Romans