Which is more competitive? Wild Riders or Glade Guard?

Post by **ihatecoldweather** » 05 Nov 2006, 07:28

:blink: On this site, alot of unit comparisons have been made (scouts vs. WW, TK vs. TM, TM vs. EG, dryads vs. wardancers, WD vs. WR, GR. vs. WR, GR vs. GG, GR vs. WHRs, etc.) so i'd like to start a thread to compare these two units to each other.

Now, your probably wondering, "GG and WR? Those two units make an odd comparison; one is slow and shooty, another is fast and CC oriented and the two units don't even share any of the same roles. So what purpose could comparing the two units have?"

Well, the thing is that the two units do share one thing in common, and that is point cost efficiency. You see, while GG and WR are not as useful or point cost effective as units like TM, WDs, Dryads, GRs, etc. they are not completely useless and are more point cost effective than units like WW, scouts, EG, TK, WHR, etc.

This means that in a few situations, GG and WR do compete with each other to be in an army, and that's when the roles of the more point cost effective units are fulfilled. For example, if you had an army in the 2.5K range that consisted almost entirely of TM, Dryads, WD and GR and you had a few points to spare would it be preferable to get some GG or some WR?

So the topic to discuss in this thread is in a more competitive WE army, would it be a better idea to get some GG or WR? The GG could give you a bit of extra shooting support, but the WR on the other hand could give you another flanker and a unit that could autobreak on a combo charge with dryads and even add some static CR (with standard and WB ).

Post by **YourMumRang** » 05 Nov 2006, 13:37

As much as I love GG I think that WR are a little more useufl. Teamed up with GR they are brilliant and their movement allows your to take the initative from the enemy.

Post by **Beithir Seun** » 05 Nov 2006, 13:44

i think i'd agree with YourMumRang the WR would probably prove to be more useful in the greater scheme of things whereas the shooting from the GG woudn't make that much difference on its own

Post by **Ithildir Hawk-eye** » 05 Nov 2006, 15:39

I'd say Wild Riders of Kurnous for the more cost efficient of the two, the fact is that they can potentially ruin an entire armie's battle strategy, which, from my experiences, Glade Guard have not been able to do (Am I doing something wrong here?). I find WR's often more than make back their points cost.

Post by **NightKnight** » 05 Nov 2006, 16:26

I think it depends a bit on what you have. If you have a slow army, the WR would be better. In a fast/CC oriented army, you might want some shooting.

Post by **Joey_Boy** » 05 Nov 2006, 21:23

Se my sig.

Glade guard all they way.

/Johan R

Post by **Tethlis** » 05 Nov 2006, 22:43

This entire discussion is based on the premise that room should only be made for either Glade Guard or Wild Riders in a 2000 point army. I continue to disagree with ihatecoldweather on the supposed "point cost effectiveness" of both.

Post by **popisdead** » 05 Nov 2006, 23:02

Wild Riders on the charge get 5 S4 attacks and 5 S3 attacks, which isn't going to kill much, but will get you your +1 or +2 CR bonus.

They are a little more effective when charged by a crap unit as they'll have a good chance at taking out 5-6 infantry and winning combat.

Basically the crap armour save, and lack of fleeing make them really hard to use.

Glade Guard just plain rule.

Post by **Lirithiel** » 06 Nov 2006, 14:34

Well if I had to choose between a second unit of GG or a unit of WR I'd defs go for the GG. The extra shooting can really pay off in the long run where your unit of WR could get into trouble and hence more victory points for your opponent.

Post by **Yak** » 06 Nov 2006, 14:45

I have to say I question the validity of the copmparison, but if I were only able to choose one unit of the two to go in a competitive army, it would be wild riders. They are one of the best support unit hunters in the game. Marginally slower than flyers, but with the advantages of cavalry, particularly fast cavalry, and they cause fear on the charge. Stubborn dwarf warmachines hate them!

Oh and popisdead: they get S5 on the charge. They hit as hard as quite a lot of heavy cavalry. And they have a choice of ward saves.

Post by **Valandil Faelivrin** » 06 Nov 2006, 16:20

I would put both units in the cost effective category. Both are very usable.

They do such different jobs that its not often that they are in competition with each other. To answer the question; " Which is better?", Ask yourself; "What does my army need?" Either unit does its job at a reasonable point cost (unlike many units in our army).

If all else is equal I would probably say Wild Riders might have a slight edge in point cost/effectiveness.

Post by **Tethlis** » 06 Nov 2006, 22:04

popisdead wrote:Wild Riders on the charge get 5 S4 attacks and 5 S3 attacks, which isn't going to kill much, but will get you your +1 or +2 CR bonus.

Did you mean 5 S5 attacks?

Post by **Prince of Arnheim** » 06 Nov 2006, 22:26

Does anyone else think that the two are totally uncomparable???

It is like comparing Rhinos and Ostriches.

They are two totally different units. They Serve totally different purposes.

I never have either in the same army in fact. I think they are from two different worlds altogether when it comes down to a strictly themed army....

I look at everything in the Wood Elf Army as being Close Combat Wild Hunt worthy or a hide-in-the-woods Forest Defenders Army.

But that is just me... :yabbo:

Post by **ihatecoldweather** » 07 Nov 2006, 05:59

Lol, interesting replies.

Too bad there are supporters for both sides.

Atm, i'm sort of leaning towards WR myself. I usually find that the WR can help give you some extra CR where you need it, where as the GG never do enough shooting damage in a game to be relivant.

Tethlis wrote:This entire discussion is based on the premise that room should only be made for either Glade Guard or Wild Riders in a 2000 point army. I continue to disagree with ihatecoldweather on the supposed "point cost effectiveness" of both.

Ok, well what if the room contains Dryads, TM, GR and WD (or any standard tourney army)? What would be best to add then? Right now i'm thinking WR because of the fear autobreak ability.

Joey_Boy wrote:WR are a fluff unit.

They're probably both fluff units, imo. :P

Also, what about the option of neither? With the extra points, you could get some GR, dryads or some random extra troops.

Post by **Joey_Boy** » 07 Nov 2006, 10:56

Well the only reason I use a unit of WR is that they are painted and I cant be arsed to paint anything up instead. I make do. However I'v always been happy with the way my archers preform. Might be my Druchii playing style where I use crossbows agressivly and then sacrefice them and counter charge the enamy unit that just killed them. Also I'm a very strong belever in dooing something in every phase of the game. You dont have to be über, just good or avrage.

I'm using 2*10 GG in all my 2K armys and I'm thinking about adding some more shooting. Both in the way of scouts and another GG unit. I'v found that all the combat I need is 2*8dryads, 8 Wardancers, 1 treeman and 1 alter. The rest of your units should be suport stuff. GG, GR, scouts, WHR, Eagles, Mages, ect. Kill your opponents suport units and you'll win the game most likely. Let his suport units survive and your in for trubble.

/Johan R

Post by **Lirithiel** » 07 Nov 2006, 11:21

Joey_Boy wrote:I've always been happy with the way my archers preform...I'm using 2*10 GG in all my 2K armies

Same and same. My 2 units of GG are just about the only ones which have performed consistently in all my games so far. I just can't see how anyone can consider not using them at all. Shooting is what WE are about -> the rules even support them.

Post by **Yak** » 07 Nov 2006, 11:26

Lirithiel wrote:Shooting is what WE are about -> the rules even support them.

Personally I think Shooting is what woodelves used to be about. GW has been trying hard to make all armies two dimensional. Take dwarves: they were your archetypal shooty army, but now a block dwarf army with strollas and an anvil is a very effective fighting force. Most armies have more than one string to their bow (badum-tish), and personally I prefer a combat Asrai force to a shooting one. Not only do I find it more fun, but I also think it's more effective.

Post by **Lirithiel** » 07 Nov 2006, 11:33

Don't get me wrong Yak. I'm not suggesting that WE should be purely about shooting I just think it is an important part of the army is all.

As I said I always play with 2 units of GG but it is far from a shooty army. I also play with 2 units of WD so could it be argued that I play a CC army?

I love to have variety in my army and as Joey_Boy/Johan said I also like to contribute to all the phases.

Post by **ihatecoldweather** » 07 Nov 2006, 20:56

Shooting is what the Asrai are about? :blink: The fluff should suggest so but the rules definatly don't. There are alot of races that are more shooty than WE. Atm, it's impossible to make a competitive shooty WE army, though it is possible to make a competitive WE army with some shooting. GW has taken so much effort to nerf the alleged overpowered asrai shooting that now, asrai shooting is just terrible! WEs are now a combat race, not a shooty or magic race.

Anyway, atm for my 2K list, i use neither WR or GG (it's a double TM list so I have no points)! The thing is that i was wondering which of the 2 units (WR or GG) would be a better addition to my army, as they both seem to suck in their own unique ways!

One of the main problems with GG atm is that the units that work well with them (EG, TK, scouts, WW, WHR, etc.) are among the more overpriced asrai units where as the units that complement WR are the more point efficient (dryads, TM, GR, WD, etc.).

Post by **Prince of Arnheim** » 07 Nov 2006, 21:05

Yeah I will continue with that argreement...Wood Elves are definetly not able to stand and shoot for the entire battle anymore...the new 7th Edition rules havn't definetly made that idea a risky one with the Crossfire and Overrunning tactics that are now being employed.

I think Shooting should be used to support the army more than as a central strategy. There certainly alot of units in WArhammer that shooting won't do to much to now....especially those with Toughness 4 and those that are in high numbers of 25-30 strong...best to leave those to the CC troops...

Use shooting to take out your enemies support units like their FAst Calvary and WAr MAchines.....

Shooting is just more technical now....it serves different purposes...whittling away at units...harassing...taking out lone trolls and machines...

I would still be wary of a 20 strong GG unit on a hill though!! Much scarier than 5 Wild Riders....unless of course there were 3 units of them.

Post by **Naggie** » 07 Nov 2006, 21:24

I feel that the riders don't do anything until they reach combat, and in my experience, they rarely do. With their low saves and pretty high cost, they are prime targets for enemy shooting.

On the other hand, we have archers. I feel they can start killing stuff in turn 1, thus making back some of the points (I know that's not a good way of viewing a game, but it's the easiest to argue with

). I usualy use my archers as baits and lures the enemy down to a slow walk in the park while I perforate him with my other arrows. Wild Riders can never flee and bait, and thus they lose a lot of the fun Elven tactics with them.

My choice would be the Glade Guards, even though it's more of a feeling than actual combat statistics.

Nagathi
The Spirit Keeper

Post by **Taishar** » 27 Nov 2006, 18:41

I bring two minimum size units of both. I like them both a lot, my wild riders tend to do a bit more for me though. They usually don't do that well first round of combat, but second round of combat or if they get charged they rock it out. Unlike those flipping glade riders...

Cheers

Post by **GreatGrandMaster** » 27 Nov 2006, 19:36

err

Well GG are extremely good at shooting pointed sticks at poeple
WR are very good at charging at people with pointed sticks

thats it really

There isnt really any comparison as they have different roles, GG arent actually that bad in HtH with elven WS and INT (i've had em defeat kroxies by S&S and not running then killing the survivor by going 1st, but it isnt a strategy to play for...), WR dont have missile weps...

I feel that WE are still a very capable shooting army i have 40 GG in a 3k force with support of scouts and WW and the damage they cause is really scary, but you can still have tons of counterattack units as GG are cheap (for WE!). My last 1.5 game with 30 GG they did most of the work for me and my counterattack units were on mop up duty

Both units are amazing, fulll stop.

Post by **popisdead** » 27 Nov 2006, 19:56

Tethlis wrote: Did you mean 5 S5 attacks?

... um yeah. brain fart.

Still IMO 5 S5 attacks doesn't do much as you hit with 2-3, wound with 1-2 (in practice not theory). With the Warbanner you can get 3 CR out of it and negate ranks.

I've taken a lot of charges from silverhelms and they are a flank charge only unit.

So,.. anyway my point was don't negate a solid 20-man arrow line for a flank unit.

I wouldn't often take Wild Riders if I had to drop: GG, GR, Dryads, Wardancers, Treekin, Great Eagle, Treeman. Those are all too solid of units.

I take Wildriders for fun, Forest Spirit theme, try something new. Never for tactical advantage.

Post by **Puppyblue** » 28 Nov 2006, 11:41

I disagree with the initial assumption that the GG are in the "not amazingly points efficient but still quite good" catagory. I think they are great for their points cost and I take them in any list I write regardless of whether it is shooting or CC based.

Sure, at long range they serve to be more of an annoyance then a threat but then again, not all damage done in fantasy is physical damage. The affects of 10 arrows constantly chipping at a unit can be quite devestating. In short range it's a different story as the damage they deal is more than doubled. They can also effectivley deal with anything short of T6 or 1+ save at short range. This is especially good as they can deal with the few units out there who can outmanouver a WE army quite well (i.e. Fast cavalry or M6 skirmishers)

So yeah, I like GG, so given the choice between them and WR I would take them no question. Actually, I would go as far to say that I would choose them over a treeman (Which I actually do, and some might think I'm insane but it works for me so I figure there's no point changing it)

Asrai.org

Which is more competitive? Wild Riders or Glade Guard?

Which is more competitive? Wild Riders or Glade Guard?