Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
What is better?
25 seaguard w/ full command, shields and magic banner (what ever is needed)
24 spears w/ full command and magic banner (room for a character)
Comes to about the same points cost
Trying to make a good 1500 list and the above choices are just above the 375 limit (25 %)
I would argue that spears plus archers are better. The Spears move and the archers shoot. The spears are equal to seaguard in combat minus stand and shoot. The archers have longbows and will shoot every turn.
..and more wounds!
What do you think?
I'd say to go with the LSG as well, but it's a close bet. My theory was always that LSG are good for those situations in which you just can't afford a regiment of Spears and a regiment of Bowmen. But now that you're looking at spending roughly the same amount for both regiments, so you may as well try going with both.
I will say however, that if you give LSG a Musician, they are better for shooting than the Archers. You're getting 24-25 ranged shots with the LSG, plus a Stand-and-Shoot. The Archers have a 10" greater range, but that only means that they'll get about 1 extra turn of shooting off. This is counterbalanced by the LSGs' Stand-and-Shoot. The Seaguard will put at least 10 shots forward, and if you volley, you can get half of every subsequent rank (round up) so that's an additional 6 shots each turn.
The other consideration is that your Archers' break point is at 3 models. Kill them, and they'll flee the field, leaving you with no shooting, and it won't take much to kill off those archers. Not to mention the fact that they are drastically over-priced (Bret Bowmen come out to about half of what you pay for an elf with essentially just +1BS).
So far, I've found Spears are better then Sea Guard. You can get many more for the same points, and in this edition bodies equals power. I had a unit of Spearman hold up a unit of Cold One Knights, and Corsairs by themselves an entire game. The Sea Guard unit in that same army died before engaging anything.
But my experience is just based off a few games, so I haven't had a lot to form a solid opinion on yet. I've got at least 5 games coming my way this weekend, so I'll know a bit more then.
Nights Justice Space Marines
Eldar Eth Kariel Craftworld
Spear of Kurnous - High Elf Expeditionary Army
I use LSG and Archers 10 Archers to cover the range and also use them to protect the back or flank depends on the games of my main army and a horde of 36 sea guards and that gives me around 700 points but with sea guard alone i don't get the amount I need and u get better shooting with archers in the sense of distance with my new list only one army I cannot beat and that is vampire counts and I already replaced the thing that screwed me over.
I'm more of a Spearman and Archers fan. Apart from being more fluffy it gives you more bodies, two units instead of one. 25 LSG probably won't get to volley fire more than once per game, if you're lucky, so essentially for the same points cost you're looking to:
-24 spears and some 60 arrows;
-25 spears and 30-40 arrows.
Plus, with the LSG one wound takes away both a spear and a bow, while in the first case you'd need two.
That said I don't think that LSG aren't worth it, but my preference goes definitely for Spears+Archers.
In an awkward shift from my 7th ed thinking, I think that it might also matter how many points you're playing at. In 7th, you wanted LSG in low-point games where you only needed 1 core requirement and didn't want to waste the space with Archers and Spears.
Now, in 8th, you might want to run LSG in higher point games. Take this for example:
You can have 2 regiments of Spears and 2 regiments of 10 archers, or you can swap those Archers for a regiment of LSG.
I never count those archers are being much help in a game. Their shooting is worthless for their points cost, and they're too small to work well as a combat unit (even in support or guard roles).
Now, although you have just 3 units on the table with LSG, you are putting 3 combat units on the table. At 2500pts, having 1-2 combat regiments on the line just won't cut it. The enemy will usually have 2-4 coming after you. But if you go with LSG, you can get about 3 of them into the fray, and you don't lose too much shooting.
I would be more inclined to field only Spearmen in my Core requirements.
The way I see it, Spearmen without Light Armor are 'basic' Elves. They could be one unit choice, with the following options:
May be given Light Armor for 1pt/model
Exchange Shield and Spear for a LongBow for 3pts/model
May be given Bows for 4pts/model
When you look at it that way, does it really make sense to take a Longbow just for some S3 shooting?? I think that this really shows why a lot of players say that Elf bowmen are terrible- they're just way too overpriced. I'd rather spend 1 extra point and lose a few inches of shooting to keep my Spear and Save. S3 shooting is an "attack of opportunity" as far as I'm concerned. I spend the 4pts for an upgrade that lets me Stand and Shoot and harass enemy melee troops from a distance (no sense marching into a Chaos army).
Statistically speaking, 6 elves firing for 6 turns with NO MODIFIERS, will kill just six T3, Sv5+ enemies per game. Is it worth pulling 6 Elves off the line for that?If you do want Elf bowmen, you need to pick them up in bulk. Nobody is going to write up an Elf gunline- it would be foolish to do so, because our archers are overpriced. So the next best thing to is to give every Elf core choice a bow.
In my opinion, the OP should've offered a third option: just Spear Elves. I'd vote for that one if I could. Elf Shooting is laughable. Our best bet is to take an RBT and leave it at that, and put Spears on the front lines.
I see your point on the points size (sorry for the pun) and I agree. From what I understand you consider LSG more like a support unit than a battle anchor, and so do I.
On another note, you got me thinking about something: our current armybook was written in 7th edition (one of the first if I recall correctly) where you had to meet core requirements with units and not with points. Now, could it be that Archers are so pricey because they allowed players to play 2k games spending only 220 points to make their army legal? You weren't paying those x points per model only for their average-ness, but also for the greater benefit they gave to the rest of the army. Now ofcourse since the rules have changed their effectiveness per pointcost ratio is just on the wrong side.
Does it make any sense?
P.S. back on topic, for a 1500 points army I'd say 24 S + 10 A all the way.
I don't use our Core choices as my main fighters in any list. I field 2 regiments of LSG to hold the line and guard the flanks of a PG anvil. If I need to win combat with LSG, I toss in small regiments of WLs or SMs.
At 1500pts, I'd definitely keep my Core values to a minimum. Although, I'd run a massed block of Spears rather than run an additional Archer regiment. Something like 30-40 Spearmen as an anvil and then field WL or SM blocks on their flanks as my fighting units.Response to Lore Seeker's PV theory
I understand your point Loreseeker. I think that the switch between 7th and 8th really mess our army up in the points department. I think that they were trying to avoid too much min-maxing back in 7th, and forcing us to pay premiums for our Core, because we needed fewer of them and could build our armies almost entirely out of Special choices (since we were allowed extra).
Now in 8th, the Elite Army rule is really messing with us, as we don't get more Special than everyone else, we just get more of the same Special. This is something I dislike about 8th as a whole- the inability to take multiples. But that's not for this thread.
The army-wide ASF also really hurts our army. ASF used to be quite redundant on our models, since we had higher Ini than most enemies. But with the new rules and our high Ini, it has become game-breaking. 2S5 attacks with a reroll should be way more expensive than a meager S3 with a reroll. And our Archers are paying for that stupid combat ability, even though you'd be an idiot to stick them into battle.
I think that our next update is going to see a drastic change in points values. Our Spearmen and Archers will probably switch values, and our Specials are going to increase in points. I think that ASF will also go from an 'army wide' special rule, to something that we get on a few key regiments. I suspect that we'll also be getting either Reavers or Silver Helms back into our Core selection, and/or Dragon Princes and Phoenix Guard might become Rare.
I think that Spearmen on their own can make a more than decent combat unit. Ofcourse you'd need to pick your fight, you want them against Men or Orcs, not against Warriors of Chaos. Anyways.
About the PV thing, I'm in agreement with you when you say that our next book's main thing will be a revision of points values. PG as rares also makes perfect sense, but instead of seeing SH back to core I'd prefer seeing them updated to reflect more their nature of nobles' sons.