Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So as someone who is starting out a new empire army and reading a lot about the core units such as greatswords, artillery and state troops I was wondering what people though of some of the more unloved empire choices. In this case Empire archers. Just wondering:

What do people think of them?
Do you use them?
What are they used for?
Are they any good?
Is there anything that does their job better?

I've always loved the idea of skirmishers hiding in trees thinning down enemy numbers before they reach my core infantry blocks but being new to empire (and skirmishers in general, never really used em in my O&G army) I'd love to get some feedback on what you think they're good for.

Archers are for shooting stuff mainly Unlike other Empire missile troops, archers are fairly flexible in that they can move and shoot. I'd argue it's nice to have a unit or two because they're very cheap and it's one of those units that in the eyes of your opponent has the potential to do something even if he's not sure what it is.

I agree. Archers are there for flexibility, you opponent probably will be focusing on more important targets. Use them to try to shoot of a rank or two before combat starts.

Question: can they be taken as a detachment?

Casper wrote:I agree. Archers are there for flexibility, you opponent probably will be focusing on more important targets. Use them to try to shoot of a rank or two before combat starts.

Question: can they be taken as a detachment?

They can, but personally I think I would rather bring handgunners

Archers are much better in 8th ed since they can march and shoot..and yes they do great as detachments, but in the role as redirectors and screens more than supporting fire.

I use 2 units each 5 man strong. They screen the troops behind them from enemy missile fire (also trying to use the terrain to give themselves protection) and when the enemy assault troops make it through the barrage of cannons, mortars, and other ammunition (and magic blasts), then the archers do their best to lead the enemy astray from the main battleline, or dying in the attempt...

In response to your original question about "is there anything that does their job better," I'd suggest that any other empire shooting is better due to higher strength. BS3 is not going to come up with a ton of hits, so as many as possible need to wound.

I own a troop of archers, which I've used in the past mainly when I wanted some scouts, but found that having no armor at all and an awful statline means that 10 points per is way too much.

I've not gotten much value out of the advantages of archers, to be honest. In other armies the ability to move and shoot and volley fire can be very useful, but the Empire is not an army skilled in manouvre warfare, and volley fire is wasted when there's little point placing your missile troops in block formation (in line or block formation they'll die very quickly).

I find the additional strength and range of crossbows most useful, with the strength and armour piercing of handgunners coming in a close second (and are actually preferred against certain enemies).

Malleus wrote:In response to your original question about "is there anything that does their job better," I'd suggest that any other empire shooting is better due to higher strength. BS3 is not going to come up with a ton of hits, so as many as possible need to wound.

I own a troop of archers, which I've used in the past mainly when I wanted some scouts, but found that having no armor at all and an awful statline means that 10 points per is way too much.

As shooters most definitely xbowmen and handgunners are better than archers, but then again I prefer warmachines over them these days....

As maneuverable screens and redirecters, as of now for the points archers are the best in the empire list. I also use empire militia detachments for this role and they are cheaper, but archers are better in "wiggling" their way through battlefield clutter and thus being able to block off the enemy routes..shooting all the way for nuisance value...so these days I use both archers and the militia as my detachments

archers are just 8 points...no need to upgrade them to the 10 pt huntsmen....

sebster wrote:I've not gotten much value out of the advantages of archers, to be honest. In other armies the ability to move and shoot and volley fire can be very useful, but the Empire is not an army skilled in manouvre warfare, and volley fire is wasted when there's little point placing your missile troops in block formation (in line or block formation they'll die very quickly).

I find the additional strength and range of crossbows most useful, with the strength and armour piercing of handgunners coming in a close second (and are actually preferred against certain enemies).

I myself usually field handgunners for that extra armour penetration and the chance to get a long rifle sniper. I'll put crossbows against low armour armies like greenskins.

Archers are also skirmishers, so less vulnerable to the enemy return shots, but still overpriced for what you get.

Not worth the points in my opinion since you can get a S4, -1 armor piercing crossbow for the same amount of points with a 30 inch range, which is better then a handgunner since the crossbow is a lot more flexible. The only time I would ever consider archers is maybe to be a small 5x man detchment to a block of State Troops and screen the unit from shooting, but thats about it.

GK wrote:Not worth the points in my opinion since you can get a S4, -1 armor piercing crossbow for the same amount of points with a 30 inch range, which is better then a handgunner since the crossbow is a lot more flexible. The only time I would ever consider archers is maybe to be a small 5x man detchment to a block of State Troops and screen the unit from shooting, but thats about it.

6" range and lack of AP isn't exactly more flexible. It's more range, and less unit champ options. I guess you can say you can choose more targets, because you can shoot farther, but you could say the handgun is more "flexible" because of the stand and fire at short range (repeater pistol champ), and armor piercing lets you take down a bigger diversity of targets.
Archer do a totally different job. They MARCH and shoot, which is a hell of a lot better than Move OR Shoot. Being able to march and fire lets you put a hero that doesn't want to go into combat in a mobile unit that's cheap, and still get a look out roll. Add in the -1 to be shot, and ignoring dangerous terrain, and you've got a pretty good sponge. The fact that archers can shoot, in addition to provided cover for the character, is just a bonus.
Crossbows: Detachments
Handgunnersarent units with champ
Archers: Mobile wizard bunker(could be used for engineer too).

-Matt

jouso wrote:I myself usually field handgunners for that extra armour penetration and the chance to get a long rifle sniper. I'll put crossbows against low armour armies like greenskins.

Yeah, there's certainly good reasons to take handgunners. If you're expecting to face high armour opponents the extra AP can be worth it. You can also take a number of units and a bunch of long rifles and start shooting up the BSB or the mage (I find sniping is only really effective when you can be confident of scoring multiple wounds each turn).

On the balance of things, I find the extra range of crossbowmen to work better for me, because you know you're getting a shot in on the first turn, but there's plenty of reasons to pick either.

if they weren't skirmishers they could have some potential with giving you cheap Volley Fire while not taking up a large footprint of the table.

I don't use Archers. No idea what they are there for. Some people think they are for shooting stuff but I wonder how they're going to achieve that. Shooting off a rank is difficult enough for missile troops, so I doubt that Archers are going to do it. To assume they could kill two ranks is folly.

Redirecting is a possibility, even though I find it just as difficult as long as an opponent keeps his line together. If unit A would end up in a bad position, he just charges them with unit B from a different angle, or the overrun/failed charge takes him closer (so "speedbump" is quite a misleading term), or he just reforms after killing them. More importantly, at 8 ppm they're too expensive to just die. I'd rather use militia instead.