You see the quantitative characteristics but don't see the qualitative ones – what is called the ability to play. Valeska might eventually come up with a tactic, but Turis already has one. Besides the cavalry bonus, which will be quite significant, there are at least 3 other tactical advantages in battle. For Valeska, these advantages turn into disadvantages. I decided to do a test: 6 Turis's horses (day 8 army) without any losses defeat 95 of Valeska's archers.:smile10:
I decided to check the battle using the Heroes III Combat Simulator – it works without taking into account the hero bonus (and tactical maneuvers, respectively). So, it shows that after the battle, 70% of the archers remain alive.

Although I didn't want to argue, you didn't convince me =) I haven't done such tests, but putting archers with a melee combat penalty, etc., against horses without cover, is nonsense (no offense, of course). Secondly, the stats that Valeska gives to the archers are not the main thing; the army itself that comes with her is more important. If Orion could bring 3 stacks of archers, then people would choose him instead of Valeska. Guys, I'm not talking about the player, and I won't argue with you, but I always try to take a "different" hero and don't leave Valeska or Turis. And if you take other heroes, the horses would still win against the archers, and it doesn't matter if it's Turis or Valeska, approximately with the same ratio, especially if they could reach them with the first move using tactics, and if not, then I think they would still defeat them on the second move with a wait. That is, they defeated them not because of Turis or Valeska, because these are level 2 heroes with a melee combat penalty without cover, but these are level 6 with a bonus, just getting started. And Turis's bonuses are ridiculous; you need to switch to any decent hero, Crag Hack, Kyrie (and there are many other logistics heroes), Tazara, Gundula, etc. And since you switch from the beginning, I like Valeska because I form my initial strike force from a stack of archers with a double shot, essentially, and not from spearmen or halberdiers. The fodder absorbs the damage, the archers do their job, and the horses will appear closer to the 7th day. And in Utopia, whether with a developed Valeska or Turis, the horses will essentially look the same. When starting, is it really impossible to protect the archers from ranged attacks without having tactics? Yes, such cases are rare, especially if you remember them. No one is arguing that tactics are a great skill, but you are talking as if you can't do anything at the start without it, but that's not true; everything is perfectly defeated even without starting tactics.
PS Regarding the ability to play, well, it's just another dick-measuring contest. Your experiment, rather, showed that I was right, not you... Swap Valeska and Turis, give the horses to Valeska, and the archers to Turis, and again, the horses will win, approximately with the same army. And I see the quality because an extra stack of archers (not to mention two) against neutrals (and at the start, there are only they) significantly increases the offensive power, and 160% fodder is enough without spearmen.
PS2 Suggest something interesting instead of trying to troll someone with "quality" and "quantity."