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.

I hear a lot of people gush about how good Kurnoth Hunters with Bows are, but based on theory I'm having a little bit of trouble seeing it.

They have fantastic range -- that much is undeniable. 30" is a lot. Their actual damage output seems to be rather poor though. Each model puts out an average of .83 unsaved wounds per turn against enemies with a 5+ armor save and no special save or cover of any kind.

Because of their range I can see how you could keep them out of harm's way pretty easily, but I just don't see how their offensive output is all that threatening considering their point cost.

It seems to me that their optimal use would likely be sniping enemy war machine crew or enemy support characters. War machine crew I can see as being useful and quite valid, but from what I hear war machines aren't all that popular in general. It also seems like war machine hunting is not exactly something that Sylvaneth need help with either.

Character sniping looks more promising, but I'm not sure the offense is good enough to really be able to count on this. A 3 man unit of hunters would take an average of three turns to kill a bloodsecrator who is completely unprotected and out of cover, for example.

For objective-based scenarios it seems to me that the bows would be even less compelling as they don't really provide enough pressure to move the enemy off objectives.

Am I missing something here?

You don't need to keep them out of harm's way. They have a 4+ that's rerolleable in melee unless they charged, or a 3+ with the cover that they probably have, their melee attacks aren't bad, and they can stomp for mortal wounds. Sylvaneth have ready access to healing for them as well.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
You don't need to keep them out of harm's way. They have a 4+ that's rerolleable in melee unless they charged, or a 3+ with the cover that they probably have, their melee attacks aren't bad, and they can stomp for mortal wounds. Sylvaneth have ready access to healing for them as well.

Sure, but 3 hunters with swords do ~11 unsaved wounds against 5+ save (including trample) per round while 3 hunters with bows do ~3 wounds against 5+save (including trample) per round. It'd take 3 turns of shooting to break even with just one round of combat.

The damage numbers don't tell the whole story. The point is that the bow hunters can pick off key targets while being largely unconcerned with being attacked in melee, and they allow the Sylvaneth to camp in wildwoods much more than they normally could. In another army maybe the melee would see more use. Honestly I see melee hunters all the time though, many armies run both because they are good in any capacity.

This is one of those scenarios where mathhammer sometimes fails us. On paper, they look kind of underwhelming, but in practice, they can be nasty. Doing D3 wounds for each unsaved wound can add up over a couple of turns. Throw in all their other perks, and at 180 points for 15 wounds, they are not bad at all.

3 might not be bad by themselves, but 6 can be a real pain to deal with simply due to their range and durability.

You have to compare their ability and survivability compared to what others can do.

They have the longest range and incredible durability.

I love them for sniping Leader type units. But shooting at units like a Stonehorn.... not so good.

Yeah, the swords do more damage in a round but a kurnoth may take 2-3 turns to get a charge while the bowman can get 3-5 turns of shooting while re-rolling 3+ saves (4+ base improved by wyldwoods and/or branchwych... 2+ re-rollable sounds nasty.) It's not only damage but utility and survivability, Killing 10 freeguild guards is ok, they've made half their cost. Killing a cannon is very good as they've made their cost AND sniped a dangerous threat.

Rob from warhammer TV won the alliance tournament with a list of 3x Hurricanums, 3x Gryph Hounds, 30x Glade Guard and 9x Kurnoth Hunters with bows. Not only did he win all 3 games, he also tabled his opponent every game scoring maximum victory points. So Kurnoth Hunters with bows have been shown to be absolutely devestating.

 Bottle wrote:
Rob from warhammer TV won the alliance tournament with a list of 3x Hurricanums, 3x Gryph Hounds, 30x Glade Guard and 9x Kurnoth Hunters with bows. Not only did he win all 3 games, he also tabled his opponent every game scoring maximum victory points. So Kurnoth Hunters with bows have been shown to be absolutely devestating.

Well I see that too, I would say Hurricanums are eually davastating since they do tons of MW in middle range...

Another reason he can win is this list is a good counter for Skryre, Skyborn Slayers (with terrain and hounds) and some melee list focus on survivability. If he encounter empire cannon lists with also Hrricannums blocking crew or Pure Thundertusk lists, he will have problem.

It would come down to who got turn 1, really.