Topic: What's Your Take on Using Empire Archers?

[Rowsdower]

I've always been confused by Empire archer rules.
Half the rule books i have state that archer are best used for skirmishing and or hit & run attacks and that they operate best in small units.
Yet i frequently see people use giant blocks of them.
What's everyone's personal take on this?

[Zygmund]

I use Empire archers in small units for chaffing/redirecting, march blocking, screening and threatening unarmoured low T troops, especially NG Fanatics and solo wizards.

I always try to include at least a unit of Huntsmen (longbows in the 6th ed!), and often a detachment of ordinary archers. They are helpful.

As to why people might use them in big units, I'm not entirely sure. They are nimble skirmishers and can move freely. And more shooting is more. Still, they are a bit expensive for what they do.

I've seen larger units used only in lists that have some (fluff) reason not to take Pistoliers. For example the Army of Middenland/Cult of Ulric lists, or fan-made Halfling lists. Of course archers are core, whereas Pistoliers are not, so that might also be a reason.

8th ed introduced more upgrade choices in the form of command group. I remember people had ideas about stronger archer units then. I myself used a unit of nine archers and even sought to challenge some small units into close combat. But they were a nuisance at best, easily countered.

Could it be the models? The Free Company/Militia box allowed you to build ten archers, as did the new Huntsmen/Archers box. And people liked those models. So if they have 10-20 archers painted, maybe they use them in a big unit just because?

Edit: the 5th ed monopose Bret bowmen are some of the cheapest ever GW models around, and have been available in second hand ever since 1996. Head swaps can turn them into OK Empire archers. Model-wise they might be the cheapest option to build up an Empire army. I think around a quarter of my archers are these models, a nice 10-man skirmisher/shooter unit. This could also partly explain the big archer units.

-Z

[Rowsdower]

The militia kit was such a wonderful kit i never get tired lamenting about.
It also reminds me of a discussion i had here with some others a few years ago out Empire weaponry and Renaissance era warfare.
I guess most people use archers sparingly as there are 'better' options with the kits. Models with early firearms look more threatening against foes who are armed with pointy sticks.

[commandant]

I used to take them as a screen unit in the 5-10 size and toss them in front of a big unit of greatswords or something to block line of sight for charging and shooting in 6th ed

[Warlord]

Are you sure its one big unit, and not multiple little 5 man screens in front of blocks of infantry?

[GamesPoet]

I recall using them as 5 figure screens for larger units.

Plus it is goes with the fluff for my Aver River Regiment.

[Mike Stockin]

In 3rd only the front rank can fire so that limits you to single ranks, with a unit of say 10 archers that is quite some frontage.

I am re-organising my units for my Empire, but I plan on having one unit of scouts out in front to harass the enemy and act as a screen/sponge.
I will then have smaller units of probably 5 on either side of the bigger units to guard their flanks.

Given the effectiveness of the Empires artillery I am not sure I will use archers much in the way of attacking, but more as a deterrent.

[Rowsdower]

In 3rd only the front rank can fire so that limits you to single ranks, with a unit of say 10 archers that is quite some frontage.

I am re-organising my units for my Empire, but I plan on having one unit of scouts out in front to harass the enemy and act as a screen/sponge.
I will then have smaller units of probably 5 on either side of the bigger units to guard their flanks.

Given the effectiveness of the Empires artillery I am not sure I will use archers much in the way of attacking, but more as a deterrent.

That makes perfect sense.
I dont understand why Empire archer seem to be rare as surely bows are easier to manufacture than crossbows and or cumbersome firearms which have lengthy reloading proceedures

[Mike Stockin]

I didn't know they were rare?
But then whilst a crossbow may be more fiddly to make, they are much easier to use and more consistent in their damage.
Normal bows do damage based on the pull, if you are weak then you can't deliver as much damage as your draw will be less.
Crossbows have the same pull and you don't need to be strong as they can have mechanical winding mechanisms.
I guess also crossbows can be made from any old wood and one size fits all?
Firearms are defo low on my list, they are as you note slow and if you use the misfire rules then potentially dangerous to the user.
I have one unit of 10 for cool factor only.

Having said that, in a defensive position handguns will deliver a nice slap up close.

[Fidelis von Sigmaringen]

I didn't know they were rare?

Depends on the edition. According to the 6th edition AB, "Crossbows are not popular weapons in the Empire, though Tilean mercenaries are often recruited to augment the firepower of an Elector Count's army. Some Counts from the southern provinces retain units of Crossbowmen as part of their personal household troops. "

However, the 7th edition AB (translated from German) stated that "most elector counts retain a large number of Crossbow regiments, and often mercenary crossbowmen (in particular Tileans) are hired."

I had not noticed it, so far, but the 8 th edition AB unit description has no separate entry for either Crossbowmen or Handgunners.

[Mike Stockin]

Interesting, in 3rd there are 2 compulsory units.
Helblitzen (Halberds) and Armbrustschutzen (Crossbowmen).

This would suggest crossbows are very common.

However I think  @Rowsdower was saying the archer (bow) is rare rather than the crossbow?

[Mathi Alfblut]

In the army I am putting together i got one unit of crossbow and one of handguns. It is a Nordland themed army but that also acts as a mercenary company from time to time.
I have one unit of crossbows and a unit of huntsmen and a unit of handgunners.

Nordland is supposed to be backward so a unit of crossbows made sense to me. Guns are more expensive so background wise, the huntsmen and the crossbows are locally recruited. But the handgunners are a special units with soldiers from allover the place. They are personally selected by the commander while the crossbows are standschutzen, a part-time unit from the commanders county.

[Wolfgang aus Wien]

My Empire army is based on a self-created city in the eastern Empire where things are perhaps slightly less 'modern' than they would be in, say, Nuln or Altdorf, and has a more late Medieval/early Renaissance look rather than the late Renaissance look currently being favored.
To achieve the look I want, I'm using a lot of Battlemasters figures (among many others) and their Archers still look great, imho, despite being monopose and 30 years old.
In terms of game usage, I'd say small units to screen more valuable troops or harass enemy flanks and war machines are the way to go.
In 5th edition, I used a heavily min-maxed Night Goblin army - had to, all my opponents were major power players - which featured a unit of 5 NG Archers and they always did phantastically well considering their extremely low cost.

[BAWTRM]

My Archers are also from the old Battlemasters game and they indeed look great. Professional archers instead of the militia look you get from the Free Company models (great for my Huntsmen unit though).

[lcmiracle]

Interesting, in 3rd there are 2 compulsory units.
Helblitzen (Halberds) and Armbrustschutzen (Crossbowmen).

This would suggest crossbows are very common.

However I think  @Rowsdower was saying the archer (bow) is rare rather than the crossbow?

In thought of this as army doctrine more than availability of weaponry. For example, the French used crossbows prominently throught out the hundred years world despite Crecy and Agincourt, and even then heavy cavalry still had successes late into the war. Their missile troops were primarily mercenary from the Italian kingdoms such as the Genoese crossbowmen.

And the English longbowmen was really something only the English could field anyway; longbowmen require long periods of training, which the English had laws mandating something like the freemen to practice shooting with them a minimal number of days each year. In contrast the crossbow was much easier to use. Which is also why firearms replaced the bow in the end -- it didn't start out better than bows, but when it became clear that guns could be used by a peasant with very little training, it took over because the ability to raise more able soldiers> the ability to raise few elite fighters.

The Empire has the gun (musket) and 2500s the guns would have been around for more than 500 years (Mordheim had guns), it worked like the HRE and fielded units like the HRE, including ITelian mercenaries because they can get more soldiers quickly that way.

Me, personally, I just thought being able to move and shoot in 8E Empire was a nice little bonus, but I prefered Handgunners.