Harpies suck

[Panfilo]

I dunno, these seem like the most lackluster flyers in the game. Even Fel Bats have advantages (being undead, easy to heal/ressurect, strong with Isabella's skills). Harpies just seem to be there for the sake of Beastmen and Dark Elves having some flying units in their roster.

I get that not every unit needs to be uber-elite, but with the way this game works, I feel like a unit should either be really flexible, cheap to recruit/maintain, specialized, or have traits unique to that faction. Harpies don't seem to have any of this. Their only asset is that they are a flying unit, but beyond that there's not much else to them. Their leadership and durability is pretty low and I can't really think of many situations where either faction that can recruit them would really NEED to have them.

[THEDOSSBOSS]

They are used to disrupt and take out archers, to hold them for a time. They are inexpensive and are good for nothing else

[Panfilo]

Yeah that's what I use them for, but their durability and leadership is so low you need another unit to draw fire from the archers in order to tie them up without getting shot up/routed. It just feels like kind of a hassle especially when Beastmen have plenty of quick infantry to close in anyway and Dark Elves have no shortage of shielded units and monsters.

[burningmime]

Agreed. As a Fell Bat replacement, they're awful. Fell Bats are inexpensive and easy to get early game. Further, Fell Bats fufill a role that's nessescary in the VC army, while that role really isn't as important in the DE army because the DE have ranged of their own. Also, dark elves have no way to easily regenerate lost units (VC have raise dead, but DE don't even have global recruitment, just black arks). Therefore, expensable units in general don't seem like a good use of resources after the early game, and their cost makes me very leery of fielding them in Quick Match.

I guess maybe the idea is that they'd be good for taking out undefended artillery. Fair enough, maybe they'd have a bit of use against dwarf/empire AI (I never seem to fight either of those factions in the DE campaign, so haven't tested it). I think I would rather have cavalry, though, since the cav can do other useful things too.

[Shandor]

Yeah they suck in TT and in TW:W. Harpies just suck .... :)

[The Mighty Mulletman]

I made good use of them in my last beastmen campaign. They're cheap enough and flying units are harder to deal with than hounds or cavalry.

[Voxrox]

Originally posted by Shandor:

Yeah they suck in TT and in TW:W. Harpies just suck .... :)

Must be a horrible experience though...considering those teeth ... *cough*

I ... leave myself out ....

[Shirome Artiste]

They become adequate archer/artillery hunters when you get all their techs and/or lord buffs are applied to them.

The problem is, even then they're just that. Adequate at THAT specific job. And DE have plenty of more than adequate archer hunters FAR earlier than you can get harpies(Lv3 capital + investing in an expensive building chain that only nets said harpies at lv3). I mean, shielded darkshards are better against other archers in a vacuum as well as said darkshards being an absolute horror against unshielded infantry.

And if you're desperate to run down fleeing foes dark riders are better at riding down fleeing foes anyway.


The issue with harpies for DE is that they are only available at a point in the game where the only roles they can fulfill are already being done far better by other units.

Beastmen can at least get -some- use out of them because their archers are pretty lacklustre but even then I feel that it's worth more against most opposing forces to have the extra oomph pushing through their infantry line or a few extra stones hurled from downtown FAR outweighs any value tying up their archer line in exchange for the harpies pretty much getting wiped out is.

[Ysthrall]

If harpies were not in the game, I suspect that the Beastmen and DE players would be complainig about their absence.... ("aaargh, unit X is absent game is unfinished CA are incompetant!")

I use a couple of them for hunting down fleeing units, artillery, and a couple of rear charges. Also in some siege assualts.

Because I want the Dark Riders doing actual combat.

[gerzald]

And they are butt ugly. Where are the hotty winged battle babes?

[YaMe]

I try to get a few units in my army as beastmen as a general rule, but purchase them with higher vet to kick start them.

[Kaaz]

I use em for artillery disrupting if i do put them in my army. They are usually a stopgap until i can get dragons (if im dark elf). Beastmen i get more use out of then. I prefer fast stuff that flys rather than regular cavalry

[Xander Tyrann]

i tend to like them as a unit that can chase down enemies but also assault walls in siege. I'm not a big user of cavalry.

[Betty]

I don't use cavalry, they're decent when teched up but they don't get some of the more advanced stuff Hydras and Dragons do which they should.

In bigger groups they're devastating but they need a buff.

[Zugs]

they are ok for anti arty unit.

[Castillomars]

Honestly, they really do suck, I just use them to fly into the bloated corpses of the vampire coast