Archers are not the best core choice

[HERO]

For most competitive lists, a lot of us here likes to run with 2x 10x Archers for min core. I've been looking into this lately, and I'm really starting to think the 10x Archers are not the best choice.

I think more optimal choices would be the cheaper 10x Spears, or even the more expensive 10x LSG. The reason is this: Archers are effective in the earlier stages of the game. They act as fodder, shoot some shots with their Longbows, but otherwise die to return fire or anything of that sort.

Spears act as excellent flank anchors, they can fight with hw/shield in CC if they need to stick around just a little bit more, and they have light armor, shield for 9 points each. They are often ignored and can help flank charge and deny ranks when needed. They're also small enough to misdirect and if they die (god forbid my fellow Princes), they do so for the greater good of your army.

I don't know guys. They've been working better for me. What do you guys think?

[Musashi]

In large games, or in alliances, Spears do appear the more viable option, or at least, you should consider a 50% split between the two.

[Siegfried VII]

Archers are useful in the way that they can get rid of the small annoying enemy units (fast cavalry, dogs, wolfs etc...) but can also threat the opposing shooters ( empire or dark elf crossbowmen, handgunners, wood elf archers). So unless you plan to go full on the rbts archers are a better choice imo.

[Prince_Asuryan]

I still prefer archers.

I ran a shadow warrior list all of last year, and the army had 3 units of 10 LSG in it. They were good, but far from fantastic - archers are just better point for point when spear numbers are below 20.

[SpellArcher]

Depends on the foe I reckon.

10-man spears can be useful for messing around and they're cheaper. Archers add a little firepower where required. Depends what else you run too.

[Feyd]

10 Spears act as a great screen for our precisou swordmasters. I use them as bait and run away screens and flankers. Lets face it, in comparrison to other archer units our there HE archers are not great. I prefer LSG everytime over archers. Spears however do have there uses. If I am not running 10 Spear screen unit then I run one unit of 23-24 spears with trimmings.

[Musashi]

With Spears there probably is no middle ground, either minimum or maxed-out between 21 to 30.

[Griffon Prince]

It's all down to personal preference and who your opponents are. I favor 2 units of archers because they aid my RBTs. I have nothing against MSU spears as I have used them a number of times myself but I find the need to play "sit back and shoot" very important in today's metagame.

[dwarfkiller]

Hello all! It has been a while since my last post, I just got back home about six months ago after a year deployed to Iraq and have been taking a lot of time to reconnect with the fam!

I rather like the spearmen and use them a lot more often over the archers. I used to play really heavy magic and shooting, but recently I find my lists lacking in those areas... usually a mage as a scroll caddy, just enough until I get into close combat.

I normally take 2x 20 spears and place them inbetween other infantry units. If I place a character in them, it is usually a mage due to I feel that they are a decent bodyguard for the mage. SM or WL might be a better choice to some for there hitting power, but I have had really good luck with the extra attacks the spears get. I would say that about a little less than 10-15% of the time I might lose the mage before 1st round of combat to some reason whether it be focused magic, shooting, or frontal attack.

On the other hand... everytime that I have used archers they get some shots off, but seem to have never really pulled there wieght on the battlefield and the other players just ignore them anyways steering clear or just out of close range... at that point I am rolling 50% hits.

Just my experiences,

DK

[Lord Anathir]

I like a mix of the core units. all have their purpose.

[Tethlis]

12 Lothern Seaguard with shields and musicians. Just as good as spearmen, nearly as good as archers but with better survivability, and only slightly more expensive. They can shoot, they can flank, they can bait/redirect, they can defend warmachines and serve as a home for casters.

[limkopi]

ZOMG, HERO is back!

I use archers for flank charges, redirect, and disrupting my opponents if the opportunity arises. The downside of this is the lack of a save and the extra point cost, but you get to maybe take a wound off infantry or support units (to, say, reduce a rank or bring things below US5). Let me try the 10 spears this weekend and see what happens.

[Musashi]

At 1500 points, I am trying out LSG, since I need only one Core unit. Haven't found the ideal strength yet, but it won't exceed fifteen, is my estimate.

[HERO]

ZOMG, HERO is back!

I use archers for flank charges, redirect, and disrupting my opponents if the opportunity arises. The downside of this is the lack of a save and the extra point cost, but you get to maybe take a wound off infantry or support units (to, say, reduce a rank or bring things below US5). Let me try the 10 spears this weekend and see what happens.

For the time being yeah
I had serious Warhammer withdraw and played every single day this week. It's the only time I'm free! (on Winter break)

But yes, I've been playing with 10x Spears instead of Archers lately and they've been working out much better. The extra 40 points over 2x Archers bats gives me a lot of options.

[Sturen]

I think there is a phycyological thing as well, players don't want to take core just for the sake of taking core. 10 archers is pretty much the optimum size of a archer unit. Spears make far more sense in large blocks. 10 spears have sutbler uses but until you try it it would feel pointless.

I actually have never used 10 spears that's just my 2 cents, though I'll give them a shot

[geoguswrek]

The differences between archers and spears can be summed up thusly (when taking units of ten):
Spears have a better armour save
Archers can shoot.

Basically i like archers because against a lot of armies there are soft things i want to shoot off before they reach me (swordmasters perhaps), and i don't want to redirect my bolt throwers from shooting knights or other tough targets.
I don't see many situations where the spears armour save is going to make a difference, because you are either going in to deny ranks, in which case archers would have done the job just as well, while being able to shoot if necessary, or you are getting charged, in which case a puny 4+ shouldn't make a difference.

Have you tried agressive archer units? use them like you were your spears, but with the option to shoot. (They are better againsst light charges because they get the stand and shoot)

[WarpPhoenix]

I couldnt agree more georgus, I use my archers in exactly the same way. Archers are usually one of the last things I put down agaisnt armies like dark elves and anything with an expensive unit or annoyance unit that will have like a 5+ armour save and is thoughness 3. Archers really ruin dark riders days, they wont kill all of them in the first volley, but they'll kill about 2-3 if you're on average which makes them a lot less effective, then another round (assuming they passs the panic) will either make them obsolete for the game (at which point i can clean them up at my leisure) or be completely destroyed.

I like to use my Archers agreesively too, moving them fowards to get them into close range is great, because they have a huge arc and range and once they're within half, hitting on 3s it gets a lot better, they're also not too bad at shooting greater daemons that didnt take an armour save, close range you hit on 2s then its 6s to wound with only a 5+ ward to stop you. You have to give archers a priority target that they keep on for the game. My archers will always target Horrors, Letters, Fast cav of any kind, large targets with a bad armour save, all ogre units of any kind, most elf units and so forth. Not only this but if my opponent has a lot of flyers I can put them against my bolt throwers and they make amazing bolt thrower protectors.

[Tethlis]

I definitely disagree. Look at the units that frequently threaten bolt thrower crews or try to marchblock: Harpies, fast cavalry, Scouts. Most of these units have little or no armor, and are T3. 10-12 spear attacks will utterly destroy them, and the spearmen/LSG will still have a 5+ armor save in return. If you're expecting your cheap, minimum-sized Core unit to hold off heavy cavalry or a Bloodthirster, then you shouldn't be using your Core choices for that. However, spear-armed Core units can easily hold off marchblockers and warmachine hunters, whereas Archers are vulnerable to just about anything. The ability for spear-armed Core to fight in two ranks even when charging makes them excellent flankers, not just denying a rank bonus to the enemy but actually able to generate kills against most opponents. Lothern Sea Guard can fulfill all these roles. Paying a few points more for versatility seems reasonable to me.

[Meif]

Taking two units of archers is a bit boring. I do it because it's what powerplayers do but I've been considering two units of 15-18 Lothern Seaguard with full command.

[WarpPhoenix]

I definitely disagree. Look at the units that frequently threaten bolt thrower crews or try to marchblock: Harpies, fast cavalry, Scouts. Most of these units have little or no armor, and are T3. 10-12 spear attacks will utterly destroy them, and the spearmen/LSG will still have a 5+ armor save in return. If you're expecting your cheap, minimum-sized Core unit to hold off heavy cavalry or a Bloodthirster, then you shouldn't be using your Core choices for that. However, spear-armed Core units can easily hold off marchblockers and warmachine hunters, whereas Archers are vulnerable to just about anything. The ability for spear-armed Core to fight in two ranks even when charging makes them excellent flankers, not just denying a rank bonus to the enemy but actually able to generate kills against most opponents. Lothern Sea Guard can fulfill all these roles. Paying a few points more for versatility seems reasonable to me.

Your first situation seems to imply that these things are CHARGING your spears, or you're going to catch them... nah, not really going to happen. They're going to dance around those 10 spears (which is even MORE min core than Archers). You seem to play Wood Elves so you MUST understand that this will happen to them? You've played with Glade Guard so you know how great it is to be able to shot on an enemy you just rounded on, fair enoguh we'll be at an additional -1 but its something, better than turning then wasting a turn, and if you suggest to not follow them around then they're going to run around free.

The point with the Archers is that they can put down the amount of "attacks" that a spear block unit has but without fear of being attacked back. Yeah you have have some armour as a spear unit but if you want those many attacks you have a 5+ armour save, what kind of enemy that makes that armour save matter will you not just destroy on the first set of attacks anyway? You dont need the armour. You can use them as flank denyers, yeah ok I'll give you that, even though archers can do it too. You say spears will generate kills, but if you have a unit of archers that want to deny some ranks (they will be at least 3 ranks deep if they are worth denying) you'll be able to have around 6-8 attacks due to your archers being in a long line and they have the SAME strength and weapon skill, should there be a difference in this?

The only reason I dont take LSG is because I like 30" on my archers, more times than I can count I have seen my archer units hit units between the 24-30" mark. The 30" is so huge of an advantage I dont really know if I can convey its importance without showing you on the board. The extra range gives you an extra round of good shooting, rather than hitting on 5s. It also lets you outshoot repeater xbows, all guns, all normal bows.

Another point to make is that Archers compliment RBTs perfectly, like georgus said you cant waste your RBT shots on fast cav or something silly like that, if given the opportunity to wipe out a dark rider unit I will always concentrate RBT first onto them just because they can shoot and are a dangerous thing to let ride around, but most of the time I'll use archers to hit them.

[Hoof&Mouth]

I usually field 2 big units of spears and 2 units of archers ( I play with a pretty friendly bunch ) but if I were going for the most competative army with min core I would use 2 x 10 man LSG.

[Allerion]

if im running a caledor list w/out RBTs, id like at least a little shooting, personally.

also, in most cases, when i bring them, i doubt im going to want my RBTs to target things like scouts/light infantry.

[Tethlis]

First off, I'm not arguing for minimum-sized Spear units. I'd field Archers, or I'd field small-sized Lothern Sea Guard, but not small spearmen units.

Your first situation seems to imply that these things are CHARGING your spears, or you're going to catch them... nah, not really going to happen. They're going to dance around those 10 spears (which is even MORE min core than Archers). You seem to play Wood Elves so you MUST understand that this will happen to them? You've played with Glade Guard so you know how great it is to be able to shot on an enemy you just rounded on, fair enoguh we'll be at an additional -1 but its something, better than turning then wasting a turn, and if you suggest to not follow them around then they're going to run around free.

They won't be charging the spears, because they know they can't handle them. That's the point, the spears are dangerous to the sort of light, mobile units that threaten mages and bolt throwers. With a bare minimum of intelligent positioning, it's easy to interdict these sorts of opponents and keep your backline safe. Mobile enemy units can run around all they like, but if they're being denied access to the units they want to charge, and are faced with spears instead, then running around is useless.

Okay, so Archers can reach out and hit an enemy, while spearmen can't. That's where Lothern Seaguard come in, full capable of shooting AND fighting. Excellent. The 30 inch range of Archers is less important when you're dealing with enemies right on top of you. LSG give you a dual threat, the ability to shoot AND fight.

The point with the Archers is that they can put down the amount of "attacks" that a spear block unit has but without fear of being attacked back. Yeah you have have some armour as a spear unit but if you want those many attacks you have a 5+ armour save, what kind of enemy that makes that armour save matter will you not just destroy on the first set of attacks anyway? You dont need the armour. You can use them as flank denyers, yeah ok I'll give you that, even though archers can do it too. You say spears will generate kills, but if you have a unit of archers that want to deny some ranks (they will be at least 3 ranks deep if they are worth denying) you'll be able to have around 6-8 attacks due to your archers being in a long line and they have the SAME strength and weapon skill, should there be a difference in this?

12 Lothern Seaguard charging the flank of a 4-deep unit gets 12 Attacks, plus 5+ armor. Archers charging the flank of a 4-deep unit get 6 Attacks. LSG have twice the amount of attacks, and better armor. Now, there's no question that 12 Attacks will make much more difference than 6 Attacks, and that a 5+ armor save is a HUGE improvement over being unarmored. If you're contemplating charging Archers into the flank of a unit, then presumably the unit you're charging is quite fragile and has virtually no hitting power. Otherwise, you wouldn't charge, because you're handing your opponent free kills. With that in mind, Lothern Seaguard with their extra attacks and better armor should be able to easily butcher and survive an opponent that you would consider charging Archers into.

The only reason I dont take LSG is because I like 30" on my archers, more times than I can count I have seen my archer units hit units between the 24-30" mark. The 30" is so huge of an advantage I dont really know if I can convey its importance without showing you on the board. The extra range gives you an extra round of good shooting, rather than hitting on 5s. It also lets you outshoot repeater xbows, all guns, all normal bows.

Sure, 30 inch range is great, and is the best argument for taking Archers. However, the idea of "out ranging" an enemy is only relevant versus a few armies with specific 24-inch-range shooting or if you really want to take first turn. Now, let's be honest: S3 shooting from a unit of 10 models isn't going to decimate anything extremely quickly. If you're really concerned about the shooting threat of those armies, and want to clear them quickly, you can use bolt throwers for a couple of turns to alleviate that pressure. S3 shots from a couple of Archer units isn't going to be murdering too many opponents at long-range, and against many targets (fast cavalry, combat-oriented skirmishers) you'll do just fine with 24 inch range and increased fighting ability of Lothern Sea Guard.

[geoguswrek]

They won't be charging the spears, because they know they can't handle them. That's the point, the spears are dangerous to the sort of light, mobile units that threaten mages and bolt throwers. With a bare minimum of intelligent positioning, it's easy to interdict these sorts of opponents and keep your backline safe. Mobile enemy units can run around all they like, but if they're being denied access to the units they want to charge, and are faced with spears instead, then running around is useless.

but this means you are commiting an expensive unit (about 160 points at least) to the job of blocking something cheaper and in a lot of cases the best you will do is prevent them from charging their most important target, they can still shoot or charge something else, or indeed, get infront of your main blocks or marchblock, none of which those spears can do anything about, because they can't hurt the flak. Indeed all your spears will be doing is being an expensive annoyance.

12 Lothern Seaguard charging the flank of a 4-deep unit gets 12 Attacks, plus 5+ armor. Archers charging the flank of a 4-deep unit get 6 Attacks. LSG have twice the amount of attacks, and better armor. Now, there's no question that 12 Attacks will make much more difference than 6 Attacks, and that a 5+ armor save is a HUGE improvement over being unarmored. If you're contemplating charging Archers into the flank of a unit, then presumably the unit you're charging is quite fragile and has virtually no hitting power. Otherwise, you wouldn't charge, because you're handing your opponent free kills. With that in mind, Lothern Seaguard with their extra attacks and better armor should be able to easily butcher and survive an opponent that you would consider charging Archers into.

But you wouldn't trust either to break things on its own against any decent combat block, they need support, so while archers need a little more support (They are cheaper after all), lets be honest, they are both just there to cancel ranks. Plus you are thinking about flanking attacks with m5, 6 wide infantry on block infantry, why is your opponent giving you the opportunity?


Sure, 30 inch range is great, and is the best argument for taking Archers. However, the idea of "out ranging" an enemy is only relevant versus a few armies with specific 24-inch-range shooting or if you really want to take first turn. Now, let's be honest: S3 shooting from a unit of 10 models isn't going to decimate anything extremely quickly. If you're really concerned about the shooting threat of those armies, and want to clear them quickly, you can use bolt throwers for a couple of turns to alleviate that pressure. S3 shots from a couple of Archer units isn't going to be murdering too many opponents at long-range, and against many targets (fast cavalry, combat-oriented skirmishers) you'll do just fine with 24 inch range and increased fighting ability of Lothern Sea Guard.

The best argument for taking archers is to save points and use the saved 80 points to buy extra combat potential instead. Archer's 30 inch range is nice but it isnt a deal breaker unless you know you are fighting DE/Empire.
To be honest i'm not that bothered about my archers in combat, they mostly get into combat with things like chaos knights, in order to protect a bolt thrower. In these cases LSG wouldn't matter, so i say keep the points and get a chariot instead.

[Tethlis]

but this means you are commiting an expensive unit (about 160 points at least) to the job of blocking something cheaper and in a lot of cases the best you will do is prevent them from charging their most important target, they can still shoot or charge something else, or indeed, get infront of your main blocks or marchblock, none of which those spears can do anything about, because they can't hurt the flak. Indeed all your spears will be doing is being an expensive annoyance.

If that's the case, then you expand ranks and start shooting. We're talking about Lothern Sea Guard here, not spearmen, and their worth is that versatility.

But you wouldn't trust either to break things on its own against any decent combat block, they need support, so while archers need a little more support (They are cheaper after all), lets be honest, they are both just there to cancel ranks. Plus you are thinking about flanking attacks with m5, 6 wide infantry on block infantry, why is your opponent giving you the opportunity?

Archers cancel ranks, and may lose a couple of models. You've lost combat resolution. LSG cancel ranks, have the chance to generate more kills, and also have better protection, gaining combat resolution. As for the likelihood of them doing any flanking, there's enough Frenzy and Hatred out there to make it a likelihood versus any number of opponents. Versus Dark Elves, there's question of it. Plus, LSG are actually capable of fighting combats on their own with a greater expectation of success, while Archers don't have much of a chance.

The best argument for taking archers is to save points and use the saved 80 points to buy extra combat potential instead. Archer's 30 inch range is nice but it isnt a deal breaker unless you know you are fighting DE/Empire.
To be honest i'm not that bothered about my archers in combat, they mostly get into combat with things like chaos knights, in order to protect a bolt thrower. In these cases LSG wouldn't matter, so i say keep the points and get a chariot instead.

If you have Chaos Knights riding through your backline, then it doesn't really matter what your Core choices are. However, if you're looking at Skaven slaves, harpies, Dark Riders, Shades, or Marauder Horsemen, then LSG are doing a lot for you. LSG give a strong backfield defensive presence, or a decent Core fighting choice to support your other melee units if needed, or a reasonable shooting unit that's capable of fending for itself. Given how small High Elf armies are, having units that are versatile and self-sufficient goes a long way.

I do like the idea of archers + a chariot to help watch the backline, but given how unreliable and fragile Tiranoc chariots are, I can't say I'd run that setup myself.

[Wildling04]

I definitely disagree. Look at the units that frequently threaten bolt thrower crews or try to marchblock: Harpies, fast cavalry, Scouts. Most of these units have little or no armor, and are T3. 10-12 spear attacks will utterly destroy them, and the spearmen/LSG will still have a 5+ armor save in return. If you're expecting your cheap, minimum-sized Core unit to hold off heavy cavalry or a Bloodthirster, then you shouldn't be using your Core choices for that. However, spear-armed Core units can easily hold off marchblockers and warmachine hunters, whereas Archers are vulnerable to just about anything. The ability for spear-armed Core to fight in two ranks even when charging makes them excellent flankers, not just denying a rank bonus to the enemy but actually able to generate kills against most opponents. Lothern Sea Guard can fulfill all these roles. Paying a few points more for versatility seems reasonable to me.

I do like lothern seaguard and think they can be very effective, but I tend to agree with the argument that archers tend to be our best core. Archers are actually ideal against the units you name: fast cav, scouts, and warmachine hunters as you usually get both a stand and shoot and you're still striking first.

The problem with seaguard is you are paying for their versatility big time, and you're only using them for one role at a time. Archers can also outdistance other shooting that is so threatening to high elves whereas seaguard can't, including taking on warmachines at a longer distance. This means that they actually need to put their 5+ into effect more often, and it's really not useful against any decent shooting army anyway. If the seaguard had longbows, I think they would be much better.

Besides those factors, as someone else mentioned the points you save going with archers tends to be the most useful. You can go with a more minimalistic approach of spears, but I can always find a use for 20 longbow shots a turn, whereas 10 spears aren't going to be doing a lot for much of the game and will more likely act as a sacrifice unit as well.

[saintjon]

I love my seaguard. If you spend enough on them that they are a decent size they don't disappoint. If you're looking for minimum core then archers do beat spears IMO, but they are a toss-up vs sea guard also IMO. Beyond minimum core sea guard rule. With a combat character toting a great weapon in the front they can take on just about anything, especially if there is a bsb around. Expensive as they are my seaguard have gone toe to toe against chaos warriors and dwarf elites, who both cost about the same or more and done well, and those units can't torture large targets and hill dwellers like a big unit of seaguard can in the shooting phase. Plus seaguard are flat out intimidating. no one likes charging them if they can avoid it. There seems to be a common sentiment here that seaguard are an ugly expense compared to archers, instead of the viable and elite core infantry they are.

I don't see the big concern with a reduced range when you can advance anyhow. Also, hammering them for only performing one role at a time is kind of silly when previous posters are talking about archers holding a flank and flank charging and stuff. Seaguard can not only do that but hold a center.

[Wildling04]

I don't see the big concern with a reduced range when you can advance anyhow. Also, hammering them for only performing one role at a time is kind of silly when previous posters are talking about archers holding a flank and flank charging and stuff. Seaguard can not only do that but hold a center.

Advancing makes it harder to hit, at least for that turn, puts you closer to anything that might want to charge you, and allows you to be shot by almost anything. I agree that seaguard perform dual roles better than archers, the point is that you pay for it. When you start talking about making them more effective in both roles, you're then talking about increasing their points significantly, especially with a character. Seaguard can't really hold a center better than spears in today's Warhammer environment.

10 seaguard w/shields are slightly more resilient than archers, less effective at shooting, and can perform better in combat (though not significantly better -- probably on par with their points cost). 15 seaguard, especially with full command, are significantly better in combat but much more expensive (especially if you lose them), and still less useful at shooting. That's the point I was trying to make. As I said, I like seaguard I just feel that I handicap myself when I bring them, especially in battles where I know my opponent in advance. They can be a bit more useful in tournaments, but I still find that the extra points archers give me to play around with gives me the edge I need.

[WarpPhoenix]

Im not saying that I think LSG are a BAD unit, but in the same region of points cost as archers there is no contest, if you're going to use LSG then use them in a big unit, use them like spears that get a tasty stand and shoot reaction or when the enemy is avoidance based can rank up 10x2 and sit on a hill and push out 20 shots on thier own, reduce ranks when they get close and act as a combat unit, but if you take 10-12 LSG why are you not just taking archers instead? If you want to play with 20 LSG and use 2 units of those anchors instead of white lions or phoenix guar / inaddition to them then thats the way you play and thats great, but point for point, Archers are our best core because white lions will hold better than spears/LSG, Archers will shoot better than LSG and to be honest with the points cost of our elite troops and other characters/items/rares id much rather be saving my point on the core which is, lets be honest, a lot poorer than other armies core, than on my much better elite troops which are really the envy of other armies.

More times than I can count have I been complimented on my swordmasters. Not on how I used them, not on their painting but on their rules. When I can let an ogre unit hit mine without flinching and come out on top thats a sign of a good unit!

[Musashi]

What's the ideal position for an LSG unit?

Hallway up a hill, with the first rank anchored on level ground and the back two on it.