8th edition rumors: The revival of Corsairs and Execs?

[Tethlis]

Most of us have heard the tentative 8th edition rumors, particularly those that concern infantry units. In particular, it now sounds like infantry block will always be able to fight with their first two ranks when engaged to the front, regardless of factors like weapon type or a charging or ASF enemy clearing the "killzone."

My question is whether Druchii players will shift their playstyle more towards multiple infantry blocks, and whether or not we'll see Corsairs and Executioners come back to life as a popular choice. ASF Black Guard will still be able to make their attacks first, but the enemy will still be able to fight with their first two ranks and so the effectiveness of ASF as a defensive tool is lessened a bit. If you were guaranteed that you could attack with your first two ranks, would you start fielding more Executioners? Will Corsairs replace warriors, since they can gain a lot more hitting power (especially with Sea Serpent Standard) for a relatively cheap point increase? Corsairs may gain additional appeal also if it's true that a certain percentage of points must be spent on Core choices.

As someone who currently focuses on a mobile playstyle with virtually zero infantry blocks, I'm very curious about some of the proposed changes and how they'll affect competitive list composition and playstyle.

[Kuanor]

Since we don’t know how the spear rules will change we cannot say if warriors will be replaced (even if it’s unlikely – corsairs still cost to much in comparison). But even if corsairs, witches and exes will be more effective (which is good) I don’t like to think about the even more beardy BG then.

[Demetrius]

Well wouldnt it just double the effectiveness of every infantry unit? Like BG would become an even better choice because theyd be striking with 29 attacks ASF instead of 15 (7 wide with champion). Imagine WEs and Corsairs... 43 attacks... drools...

TBH I think this is why they will not make infantry strike in two ranks. Instead, Id think theyd instead make that both units strike with their FULL front rank regardless of casualties. In which case would definitely see a comeback from Executioners as their biggest weakness is nullified.

[Grimma]

With an extra attack from the Cauldron - 2 ranks of killing blow executioners would be a mincing machine.

[A18no]

With that rumor, i think i'm gonna field 2 cauldron in many list..

Black guard/corsair SSS with killing blow
Executionner with +1 attack

So much fun in this!!

[Timz]

I don't think this rumor can be true.

The "kill zone" is a core mechanic in WHFB.

There is no point to ASF at all if the enemy is allowed to attack whether they're alive or dead!

There's also no point to charging if the enemy can attack back even after being killed.

If they change it to 2-rank-infantry without that killzone-mention (there's no way it could happen) then it certainly seems like a buff to executioners. Just in that they'll have an advantage compared to Cold One Knights - being slower than them, but doing more damage on charge.

2 Ranks of 7 ASF Black Guard would be deadly though. 26 ASF hatred S4 attacks and 3 ASF hatred S6 attacks = goodness.

The 2-rank thing would mean more fighting is done by rank-n-file as opposed to champions and characters joining the unit.

Execs value would increase with cauldron adding 14 S6 attacks compared to only adding 14 S4 attacks to black guard.

[Excidium666]

I dont think that infantry will attack with 2 ranks. Yes, it applies to our warriors becouse they have spears, but otherwise i dont see it happening. The rumour i heard is that you will be able to strike back with a full rank even if you take casualties. That helps us with units that have ASF and very often you dont have the opportunity to stike back at the enemy.

I can see witch elves and corsiar with SSS having major roles in my army if that rumour is true. Finally they will be worth the points.
Execs on the other hand will still not be my numer 1 choice. Even if the killing blow they still dont do as much damage as other units would do.

I would like to see the faces of High Elf players when they realize that ASF is not so great any more .

If it goes for me - I would like to see this rumour come true. Its benesicial for our army.

But then againg its just a rumour so lets not pay to much attention to it at the moment.

Cheers

[Phierlihy]

If you think having two ranks of infantry fighting is beneficial, I suggest you think again. Do people really want Swordmasters fighting in two ranks?! Does anyone want to take on my Chaos Warriors or Chosen of Khorne when they have two ranks swinging? Expect to see three minotaurs shoved into a 2x1 formation for less frontage and the same attacks. Which would be worse if it then became a 2x2 block as standard - more attacks with less frontage than we see today. Tomb Kings would love to swing in an extra rank seeing as how they take an extra swing in the magic phase. That's just some stuff off the top of my head.

Fighting in two ranks will make elite infantry more elite but crappy infantry will still be crappy.

[Ming]

This rules change rumor is unlikely to happen.
If the problem is nerfing ASF, just drop this dumb special rule in 8th edition.

[Thanatoz]

Agreed. It will change the domination of cavalry, that's for sure, but the underlying infantry vs infantry results stays exactly the same. Your own infantry might strike harder, but the enemy strikes equally hard back.

Combine this with the "cavalry may not march" rumour (which I have no idea is true or not, and Cold One Knights will never be seen again. Ever.

Not te mention assassins will disappear, because they can't reliably kill anything in base contact and will always die after the 1st round of combat, making the ninja assassin even more used, while the more close combat focused assassins will be too expensive and risky to prove their worth.

[Phierlihy]

I can't help but disagree with everything you just said. *If* two ranks of infantry were allowed to fight, Assassins would still fill the role of "character killer". One Assassin has a high chance of killing something in a challenge and after wards is still a decent rank&file butcherer.

Infantry vs infantry will change for the worse. As it is now, a small unit of elite infantry can hold its own against a larger non-elite unit simply through active combat resolution. Depending on how the dice feel, they may win or lose the round of combat depending on exactly how many kills they get but should generally hold and the battle should swing in both directions. Allow the small, elite unit to double its active combat resolution and a small unit of 10 Black Guard will start to wholesale slaughter a block of 40 Goblins every turn. Elite infantry will be more elite and crappy infantry will still be crappy.

[Archangel]

im a little out of date with playing any WHFB at the moment can someone tell me what the "killzone" is?

[Kargan daemonclaw]

If the runour was true and you were going to get any benefit out of it you would have to field large units of witch elves or executioners to get any benefit. If you only have a unit of 10 and you are charged by a unit of knights, you could easily lose 5 models sure some get to attack back as opposed to none at present

[Thanatoz]

I can't help but disagree with everything you just said. *If* two ranks of infantry were allowed to fight, Assassins would still fill the role of "character killer". One Assassin has a high chance of killing something in a challenge and after wards is still a decent rank&file butcherer.

Except now he needs to double his kills to make sure he doesn't get any attacks back. Versus characters he remains equal, though not all characters can be reliably assassinated by an assassin.

Infantry vs infantry will change for the worse. As it is now, a small unit of elite infantry can hold its own against a larger non-elite unit simply through active combat resolution. Depending on how the dice feel, they may win or lose the round of combat depending on exactly how many kills they get but should generally hold and the battle should swing in both directions. Allow the small, elite unit to double its active combat resolution and a small unit of 10 Black Guard will start to wholesale slaughter a block of 40 Goblins every turn. Elite infantry will be more elite and crappy infantry will still be crappy.

Ah yes, static combat resolution. Forgot that, my bad. However, the active combat resolution would double for each side, no matter how you look at it, not like the poor goblins have any use of that. So yes, that would mean static combat resolution needs to be upped too. I forgot this factor because it's so non decisive these days.

[Minsc]

If that rumour's true I'll be shelving my Dark Elves and dust of my halberd carrying Chaos Warriors

In a more serious note, It's still a rumour - I'll wait untill I see the 8th Ed. BRB for myself.

[Fuzzydeath]

Another rumor involves a nerf to ASF- instead of being Always Strikes First, allegedly it's going to only go first in initiative ties.

I suppose they'd call it "AWT: Always wins ties!"

[Slappy666]

This is a touchy subject at best because i have personally lost most of my fiath in games Workshop in being able to implement such rules with out completly crushing some races that focus on killing the the frontage for no attacks back. ie) HE aswell as other races. Not too mention these rules could also make them super over powered and the races really suffering from majority of block chioces, for example a unit of twelve execs charge twenty hammers a solid no BS unit and get 13 S6 A with hatred the outcome for the tough dwarfs will for the most part be ok with their 11 S4 attacks but will prob still lose combat with 6 static and 3-4 kills the execs will have 2 static plus 9-10 kills. Thus we still have a similar damn problem !

Players might try to focus on infantry blocks (like my self) it presents a new and fun challenge for the player to over come the obsticals of limited mobility (tough but doable).

For the most part the trying to make up and even out the short comings of certian races (dwarfs or tomb kings) the only have the option of large blocks, is relativly silly when they could simply go and change their rules for that race ! Instead of this, from what i see coming from rumours im dissapointed and am going too cherish the few more months i have with this edition.

[Sadisticity]

On the contrary, in the current edition I always put an Assassin in my unit of Executioners to try and clear off the first rank of enemy units with his ASF rule before my Executioners get to strike back unmolested.


But come to think of the hypothesized new rules, I think there will be an added rule to balance the 2 rank strike. Like for example if the front 2 ranks strike... than they cannot do something subsequently.

Having 2 Ranks of Executioners striking at the opponent with a Cauldron of Blood blessing is simply obscene. (Considering ranks of 7 Executioners) 14 Exectuioners will strike, coupled with a COB blessing of +1 attack, that is 24 S6 Killing Blow re-rollable hits in the first round of combat due to Hatred rule. My opponent will surely die of heart attack.

Ohh yea. Not to mention the sexy Bikini Clad Elves who will vomit out 56 Poison attacks (rank of 7).

[Kheel]

If this would become truth, which I doubt very much, would mean that ASF and ASL is no longer a factor since you will be fighting with every model in the front rank anyway. The only time it is important is when you only have ONE rank, or the second one is losing numbers.

High Elves would lose all their chances of winning with infantry.
Standard of Hag Graef would become slightly useless.

I think the current system is flawless. A big blade is hard to swing and needs to build up momentum. If you were killed while swinging and building your momentum for a hard blow, well... Sucks to be you then.
We need to remember that Executioners for example are not always hitting last, they may get the charge, and with move 5, that happens ALOT! A whole- f-word -lot.



And fuzzydeath AWT sounds kinda cute

[Tethlis]

High Elves would lose all their chances of winning with infantry.
Standard of Hag Graef would become slightly useless.

I think a lot of players are falling into the common Theoryhammer trap of viewing scenarios in a vacuum. Sure, it's possible to create a lot of specific examples that might favor your argument.

However, just to respond to the example I quoted above, High Elf infantry would utterly massacre anything that's not infantry (which includes heavy cavalry, monsters, and the other powerhouses of the current edition. Even when fighting other infantry, Swordmasters would be able to rack up so many kills that they could deplete the second and even first ranks of enemy heavy infantry and still deny the opponent plenty of return attacks. The same applies to the Banner of Hag Graef; it will utterly destroy all non-infantry opponents, while allowing units like Black Guard and Executioners to potentially deplete or kill entire elite infantry regiments before they can attack at all.

[Fleshcollector]

As my initial reaction to the fighting in two rank rumors was complete joy, after some consideration I find it difficult to believe as it simply makes certain units nothing less than radical and on the surface does not fix anything. If now the first rank of an elite infantry can kill the entire first enemy rank then obviously two ranks would kill the enemies first two ranks. So either this rumor is false or only half true.

In order to make this rumor work we might assume that the chargers get their first rank attacking only, then the enemy, then the attackers second rank if the first rank was wiped out. Without going into too much detail, we would see that the charging unit would still win the same as it would win now but at least take some casualties so that after its battle it is not longer at full strength and so would eventually be worn down if facing many blocks of weak fodder.

Or maybe the second rank only gets one attack which limits elites but keeps the regulars at the same strength and would still serve the function of the elite units getting worn down by multiple battles.

I believe GW is capable of managing a system where they achieve their intent, whatever that is.

[Red...]

It's definitely very positive that they are looking into it, as it is an area that could benefit from clearing up.

That said, lets hope they don't make it worse - there's three ways that they could do that:

1. making it equally unbalanced (or more so) than it is currently for the combatants who strike first

2. making it too complex to be fun

3. messing up the rules so that something perfectly innocent looking ends up
- having an overly high impact on the game (e.g. personally I think that the rule stating that fear causing units who outnumber their opponents cause autobreaks ends up having a far bigger impact than I think it was intended too).
- or being totally absurd in real life terms (e.g. monsters and handlers move as skirmishers - whoops, forgot that skirmishers can move through trees....that's okay, the handlers must have chainsaws right? doh!)

Fingers crossed they get it right on this one; I can't quite decide whether to be optimistic or pessimistic!

[Tethlis]

I don't think GW's goal is nerf elite infantry. Instead, I think they're trying to promote elite infantry. Will Swordmasters, Black Guard and Chaos Warriors become powerhouse regiments? Yes. Does Games Workshop have a problem with that? No. I don't think they really care if these units become unstoppable, because they would rather see regiments tearing through the enemy than monsters or heavy cavalry. Not only do terrifying elite infantry fit the "theme" of Fantasy as Games Workshop sees it, but it's also an opportunity to sell a lot of models. Given that a regiment of 20 pewter elite infantry costs about $100.00 U.S., versus a Hydra and Cold One Knights that cost significantly less, Games Workshop would love to sell more infantry. The Hydra and COK are probably a more popular choice in the eyes of a lot of Dark Elf players, but they're significantly cheaper.

I don't think this rule change is intended to tone down infantry in anyway way, or make elite infantry versus poor infantry into a fair fight. Instead, it's designed to tone down the effectiveness of monsters and heavy cavalry and shift the focus back towards regiment-heavy battle lines.

[Layne]

I don't think this rule change has come to pass.

[[llct]kain]

Another rumor involves a nerf to ASF- instead of being Always Strikes First, allegedly it's going to only go first in initiative ties.

What I have heard is that attacks will be done allways in I order, but thinks like charging and ASF gives you some bonus and increase your chances to strike first. This is in some way supported by the new beastmen army book, some magic spells and items that increases I (in 7th totaly useless).

In the sum I like the idea - and perhaps belive it is true because of that :-)