My wishful proposal for ranged units differentiation (motivations below):
- Slingers: longest range units, very precise, very low damage, very low armor, but quite fast. Instantly get shredded by whoever reaches them. used for harassment more than anything else, like archers in A24, but somehow lower damage. Not too much though.
- Archers: heavier units equipped with a shield in their back, and slower. Good range and decent damage, but inaccurate, they are the best ranged unit if in big enough numbers. Decent also against light-medium cavalry, they are countered by heavy infantry.
- Javelineers: Fast moving, with some armor (similar to archers), they have a range short enough to make them struggle when massed. They are particularly good against heavy infantry, but not against cavalry (hard counter? maybe a trigger that makes the javelin "miss" at random against nimble enemies) and they beat archers when the numbers are low enough.
- Heavy javelineers: javelineers with big shields could have higher armor against missiles, they would be a strong counter against archers, but they would be bad against lighter javelineers, because the latter would have the "nibliness" bonus, while the former not.
- Longbow archers: nubian and indian archers are depicted with no shield or armor in the game, so maybe these should have less armor but more accuracy than regular archers.
While writing this "proposal", I realised I didn't have many motivations after all, I'll say just a few things about slingers: there is a number of sources saying they had greater range than archers, and even now you can take a long sling and learn in no time to throw rocks for hundreds of meters, bows take a LOT more exercise. Difference in accuracy between slings and bows is only introduced here as a mean for differentiation. In general though, I tried to make a "realistic" proposal overall.