Handgunners vs Outriders quick question

[yabbadabba]

Hi all,

A quick one for all the Empire experts. Having played for donkeys years, looking at the new book, it seems to me that for sheer fire power you are better off point for point with Outriders than Handgunners, but I could be wrong.

The only benefits of handgunners seem to be:
Core unit, not special
Detachment
Hochland for champion.

So in what circumstances for a regular battle (ie not one like a siege), and outside of freeing up special choice points, would handgunners be more preferable to Outriders.

Cheers

[Askari]

Outriders lose firepower faster, as each wound knocks off several shots, while for handgunners, each kill takes off one shot. Handgunners function better as a bunker for Wizards also, due to being more numerous.

Not saying they're better, just other benefits that have been overlooked

[yabbadabba]

The only problem I have with handgunners as bunkers is that they are wearing pyjamas and not much else. I hadn't thought about the reduction in fire power, good point.

[Askari]

The only problem I have with handgunners as bunkers is that they are wearing pyjamas and not much else. I hadn't thought about the reduction in fire power, good point.

I never said they're good bunkers, just.. better than Outriders

[Tuttivillus]

The reduction of fire power with wounds is the only adventage IMO. Outriders are more mobile, can redeploy as vanguard and start shooting in the first round or alternatively hide behind Your batlle line and still pepper aproaching foe due to sitting on a horseback. They are also cheper per shot pointwise . 3 hangunner shots = 13,5 slaves, 3 outrider shots=10,5 slaves.

[danny-d-b]

outriders I've found are great for blocking up parts of the battle field, as due to the number of shots and how quickly they get in to position, they are great flank defenders if your advancing, where as hand gunners might have to advance 2 turns and still be occasionally out of range
however I've got a unit of both, as mages sit quite nicely in handgunners

[Von Wibble]

Hi all,

A quick one for all the Empire experts. Having played for donkeys years, looking at the new book, it seems to me that for sheer fire power you are better off point for point with Outriders than Handgunners, but I could be wrong.

The only benefits of handgunners seem to be:
Core unit, not special
Detachment
Hochland for champion.

So in what circumstances for a regular battle (ie not one like a siege), and outside of freeing up special choice points, would handgunners be more preferable to Outriders.

Cheers

Hopefully none. The whole point of special and rare choices is that if balanced correctly you should want to use them and minimise core. Othewise they wouldn't be special. Core is the key thing in handguns favour. Stubborn if used as a greatsword detachment is the next best thing (though oc you aren't core then, and as you say have no armour either).

Outriders can also have a HLR for the champ btw.

Overall its pretty much covered - enemy missile fire will kill off your firepower with outriders faster than it does with handgunners. I find that this can be important when the enemy units are just getting a little bit of missile fire as extras, like tomb king chariots for example.

[Tuttivillus]

Hopefully none. The whole point of special and rare choices is that if balanced correctly you should want to use them and minimise core. Othewise they wouldn't be special. Core is the key thing in handguns favour. Stubborn if used as a greatsword detachment is the next best thing (though oc you aren't core then, and as you say have no armour either).

Outriders can also have a HLR for the champ btw.

Overall its pretty much covered - enemy missile fire will kill off your firepower with outriders faster than it does with handgunners. I find that this can be important when the enemy units are just getting a little bit of missile fire as extras, like tomb king chariots for example.

No, they can't anymore. Best way to field HLR now is Steamtank - Sees above troops, move and fire, 5 slaves cheaper than his handgunner counterpart.

Not necessarly, they have 5+ save for starters with a possibility for 4+.. Quite a save i suppose. So actually, as they will be still cheaper per shot than handgunners and more tough the only thing One would consider to take hgunners is core choice. I wouldn't - halberds are cheaper and more important. Outriders rulez!

[jtrowell]

Taking the barding for outriders make them lose the Fast cav rule, so no vanguard, meaning not in range in first turn, their main advantage over handgunners.

One other thing to remember is that not only outriders will lose attacks fasters when killed, but you're also much more likely to have a panic check to pass when it happens, as your starting number is lower than handgunners for the same cost. It might not be a problem against VC or WoC where shooting is almost non existant, or against some boring list lacking support because they put all their points in a deathstar or several big units thinking that it will make them invincible, but many other armies will bring some king off small fire unit as support, as they still are the best counter to other supports units (redirectors, warmachine hunters, etc ...)

Of course a solution might be, as usual, to use target saturation by taking several units with the same weakness against shooting, so your opponent cannot kill all of them so you get to sacrifice and the other go undamaged.

Flaggelants, outriders, pistoliers, small detachments (like 5 archers to use as redirectors) are all vulnerable by themselves against magic missile and shooting, but take several units of them and you will see that your opponent will eitheir dilute his shooting for less effect per unit, or focus fire on one or two and you get to have the rest of them (and your army) ignored for a while.

[Tuttivillus]

Taking the barding for outriders make them lose the Fast cav rule, so no vanguard, meaning not in range in first turn, their main advantage over handgunners.

Handgunners dont have it as well. My point is that I would field them barded in a line as h.gunners and they are still cheaper, more mobile, tougher with a possibility of shooting from behind your lines/over enemy's lines even. Hell, even frontage is smaller. Look, with halberds and ICKnights in core You really don't need handgunners anymore, and I say it with regret as I loved my Balck Soot's. The only hangunner team I would take is Ironsides from Tamurkhan Book. If anything crossbowman can compete with outriders more, where range is important.

[yabbadabba]

Cheers guys. I tend to want to use Outriders. Despite the weaknesses they are a better value than HG in an offensive Empire army.

[Tuttivillus]

Cheers guys. I tend to want to use Outriders. Despite one weakness they are a better value than HG in an offensive Empire army.

Here, fixed that for You In a defensive one they are even better.

[Souppilgrim]

I've favored outriders for quite some time now. I take them in units of 8 or so, can fire in 2 ranks, thats a lot of shots. At that size they can withstand a round of counter fire if they have to. They can be points denial later in the game, whereas my handgunners were doomed from turn one.

[Hali]

Try a unit of 20, or even 30 outriders in two ranks sometime, you won't be disapointed. Support them with flaming sword, harmonic convergence, withering, soulblight or most of the lore of metal and they can take out entire units in a single turn of shooting. Enchanted blades combined with rusting your opponents armor is my personal favorite. They are obviously quite expensive but if you trade in a combat horde they are easily affordable and can potentially cause damage every turn of the game with a little redirecting and blocking support. Removing 20+ T4 models every turn at long range makes it easy for knights or halberdiers to clean up.

[yabbadabba]

I have put this on this thread just to sound it out before I drop it on the main board:

With warrior priests now being able to channel, and having no limit on the number of Battle Prayers they can cast, You could have Volkmar, another AL on WAltar, another AL, a BStd and up to 7 WP - all with no magic, for your maximum character allowance. So 10 attempts at channeling and up to 12 bound spell attempts a turn. Now I know this isn't the most efficient army set up but..... doesn't that sound a little OTT?

[Tuttivillus]

I have put this on this thread just to sound it out before I drop it on the main board:

With warrior priests now being able to channel, and having no limit on the number of Battle Prayers they can cast, You could have Volkmar, another AL on WAltar, another AL, a BStd and up to 7 WP - all with no magic, for your maximum character allowance. So 10 attempts at channeling and up to 12 bound spell attempts a turn. Now I know this isn't the most efficient army set up but..... doesn't that sound a little OTT?

Yeah, I noticed that on empire tactiva thread p.27, but do drop in lvl1/2 with forbidden rod just for one sick boundspell spam round on a magic dice rolls: 1&1,1&2, 1&2, 1&4, 2&2 etc. so... so basically yeah, mr.Cruddace did a good work here

[yabbadabba]

Its on the tactica thread? Might have a look at that then, see what reception it got. Cheers fella