Knights or Executioners? In-depth look at the numbers.

[Thraundil]

Greetings, one and all!

I see many discussions about the forum, in army lists and elsewhere, on executioners vs cold one knights as your means of "can openers". Both provide a source of S6 attacks. Executioners are slow, rely on numbers and dont get rerolls to hit. Knights are fast, stupid, and depend on the charge to do their damage. What to pick, what to pick? I will attempt to answer this question in the following.

"Most" standard way of running executioners is a horde formation of 30 or more. Later will follow an account of their performance in non-horde setup, which is also perfectly acceptable. 30 executioners with FC and no magic banner costs 390 points, for the same price you can get 12 CoK with FC and no magic banner. These are the units that will be compared.

First follows an account of the units performance against a full frontline covered unit with T3 or T4, in the cases where you get 3+ to hit (WS4 or lower) and 4+ to hit (WS5 or higher). I assume all the models can be KB'ed.

Then I compare the two units in action against monstrous stuff (T5 and T6, again divided into WS4 down and WS5 up).

Finally, I pitch a thought-up battle between 5 demigryphon knights of the empire against an equal cost of executioners and knights.

Every piece of calculation assume 100% average rolls. I may have rounded decimals somewhere. Analysis only holds for zero magic interference


Rank and File statistics:

30 executioners FC = 390
Horde, so 31 (unit champ has 2) WS5 S6 attacks
Vs WS4 or lower:
20,66 hits
Vs T3 and T4: 2+ to wound, giving 17,22 direct wounds, hereof 3,44 KB and 3,44 1's that reroll another 2,86 wounds. Total = 20 wounds, hereof 3,44 without armor save.
Vs AS 4+ or worse: 20 casualties
Vs AS 3+: 13,8 + 3,44 = 17,24 casualties
Vs AS 2+: 11,04 + 3,44 = 14,48 casualties
Vs AS1+: 8,28 + 3,44 = 11,71 casualties

Vs WS5 and up:
15,5 hits
Vs T3 and T4: 2+ to wound, giving 12,9 direct wounds, hereof 2,58 KB and 2,58 1's that reroll another 2,15 wounds. Total = 15 wounds, hereof 2,58 without armor save.
Vs AS 4+ or worse: 15 casualties
Vs AS 3+: 10,35 + 2,58 = 12,93 casualties
Vs AS2+: 8,28 + 2,58 = 10,86 casualties
Vs AS1+: 6,12 + 2,58 = 8,7 casualties
Note: I forgot to include the chance of killing blow on the rerolled 1's, but its 1/6 of the rerolls, which amounts to half a wound at most. My apologies, I might correct it if I get around to it.


12 CoK, FC = 390
2x6 formation, so 13 WS5 S6 attacks with rerolls and 12 S4 attacks w/o rerolls. Assume charge (or knights are by far the worst choice). Assume rerolls to hit are allowed (What kind of a rank-and-file unit has I7+, anyway?). Do note that these calculations for the CoK all assume that the entire front rank of the knights survive any attacks that might strike before mount attacks.

Vs WS4 or lower:
13 knight attacks for 8,66 direct hits, 2,89 rerolled hits, 11,55 hits total. Another 12 Cold One attacks for 6 hits.
Vs T3:
2+ for knights = 9,625 direct wounds, 1,925 rerolls for another 1,6 wounds, total 11,225 S6 wounds
3+ for mounts = 4 S4 wounds.
Vs AS 6+: 15,225 casualties
Vs AS 5+: 14,55 casualties
Vs AS 4+: 13,9 casualties
Vs AS 3+: 11,35 casualties
Vs AS2+: 8,81 casualties
Vs AS1+: 6,27 casualties
vs T4:
2+ for knights, same as above, total 11,225 S6 wounds
4+ For mounts = 3 S4 wounds
Vs AS 5+: 13,725 casualties
Vs AS 4+: 13,225 casualties
Vs AS 3+: 10,85 casualties
Vs AS2+: 8,48 casualties
Vs AS1+: 6,11 casualties


Vs WS5 or WS6:
13 knight attacks for 6,5 direct hits, 3,25 rerolled hits, 9,75 hits total. Another 12 Cold One attacks for 6 hits.
Vs T3:
2+ for knights = 8,125 direct wounds, 1,625 rerolls for another 1,35 wounds, total 9,5 S6 wounds
3+ for mounts = 4 S4 wounds.
Vs AS 5+: 12,8 casualties
Vs AS 4+: 12,16 casualties
Vs AS 3+: 9,91 casualties
Vs AS2+: 7,66 casualties
Vs AS1+: 5,41 casualties
Vs T4:
2+ for knights, same as above, 9,5 S6 wounds
4+ for mounts = 3 S4 wounds.
Vs AS 5+: 12 casualties
Vs AS 4+: 11,5 casualties
Vs AS 3+: 9,41 casualties
Vs AS2+: 7,33 casualties
Vs AS1+: 5,25 casualties

Vs Higher WS, cold ones hit at 5's, so their wound contribution drops abit here. I have not done the calculation, most rank-and-file do not have WS7+ anyway.

Monster staticstics:

Vs T5 and up, the following considerations must be made. T5 often sits on monsters or "heroes". Monster bases vary abit in size - I think my war hydra base measures out to 48 mm, so lets call it 50 mm, and my dragon base might also be 50 mm, but games workshop sell 40mmx40mm monster bases as well, which would limit cavalry frontage. Infantry are 20 mm, cavalry 25 mm frontage. That means that 4 infantry models can be in B2B with a 50 mm base monster, but so too can 4 cavalry models.
MC and MI are often just T4 and with a large frontage, so the above tables apply (minus KB).

Let us see how knights and executioners fare vs a single T5 monster. Executioner/CoK champion is included in the attacks. For simplicity and armor saves, we assume that a T5 monster has 4+ scaly skin as standard, aka no armor save allowed except vs cold one hits.

Executioners vs WS4 or lower monster:
13 attacks on 3+ = 8,66 hits on a 3+ to wound, giving 5,77 wounds.

Executioners vs WS5 or higher monster:
13 attacks on 4+ = 7,5 hits on 3+ to wound, giving 5 wounds.

In other words a T5 monster should be dropped stone dead if it is stupid enough to charge executioners, or bad enough to be caught by some. Note that a regenerating monster would cut those wounds in half, and so would survive the first round. It would probably die in the following round though unless it manages to kill off enough models to limit the amount of attacks.

Knights vs WS4 or lower monster:
9 knight attacks on 3+ = 8 total hits on a 3+ to wound, giving 5,33 wounds and then 8 mount attacks hitting at 4+ = 4 total hits on a 5+ to wound giving another 1,33 wounds of which armor save leaves 0,88 for a total of 6,21 wounds.

Knights vs WS5 or WS6 monster:
9 knight attacks on 4+ = 6,75 total hits on a 3+ to wound, giving 4,5 wounds and then 8 mount attacks performing as above for another 0,88 wounds, giving a total of 5,38 wounds.
At higher WS, the mounts only hit on 5+, which means their wound contribution drops to 0,6 wounds, totalling the score on 5,1 wounds.

So against T5 monsters, knights slightly outscore executioners, but both should reliably kill W5 monsters no matter the monsters statline. However, executioners must worry about fear (and terror if charged by a monster), whereas knights care little for such things. Overall, for killers of T5 monsters, knights perform the best, though monsters with regeneration could still pose a problem in subsequent combat rounds.

Against T6 monsters (e.g. dragons), the score looks like this. A monster of this high T usually always have a WS to match, so I have limited the calculation to WS5+ monsters. In addition I have assumed that a T6 monster has a 3+ scaly skin or similar:

Executioners vs WS5 or higher monster:
13 attacks on 4+ = 7,5 hits on 4+ to wound, giving 3,64 wounds after armor saves.
In other words, executioners will NOT drop most T6 monster on first round of combat.

Knights vs WS5 or WS6 monster:
9 knight attacks on 4+ = 6,75 total hits on a 4+ to wound, giving 3,27 wounds after armor saves, and then 8 mount attacks at 4+ = 4 total hits, wounding on 6s for 0,33 wounds after saves. Total is 3,6 wounds after saves. So knights will NOT drop a T6 monster in first round of combat, either, meaning executioners would probably be the better choice for longer combats vs T6 up.
At higher WS, the mounts only hit on 5+, which means their wound contribution drops to 0,22 wounds after saves, totalling the score on 3,49 wounds after saves.

T7 and upward monsters are rare, and let us assume when it does occur it comes with WS5 or higher. Executioners gives 2,9 wounds to such a monster, before any armor saves, and knights deal 2,62 wounds at S6 + 0,66 wounds at S4. Depending on armor save, the two units come out roughly even here as cold ones perform equally well vs T6 and T7+.


The analysis here is unclear since many factors can play a role: armor saves, any ward saves, regen saves. How many return attacks and at what S the monster has. Overall, the benefit of knights shine in round 1 since they ignore fear, after round 1 their S drops however and executioners overtake them. Use the above numbers at your own discretion to decide for yourself. If shooting and magic for example drops a T6 monster to 3 wounds or less, that means your knight unit should statically drop it on the charge, so go ahead and take the charge! If he has 4 wounds left, he will likely die if you roll well, or if not, he probably will die in the second combat round, so take the risk if you feel like it. So on, so forth.


Thoughtup situation: 5 Demigryphon knights theoretical battle

Let us pit the two units against something we might want it to fight on the actual battlefield, where a direct comparisson is useful: Monstrous Cavalry. Against Regular cavalry and infantry, as we have seen, the executioners win hands down due to killing blow.

5 Demigryphon knights with halberds will strike last vs both executioners and cold one knights. They cost 320 points with FC, no magic banner. So we compare them against 24 executioners, FC (318 pts), which means a horde formation is impractical, realistically they deploy 3x8. And 10 cold one knights, FC (330 pts), deployed 2x5 realistically. In both cases, we could tweak the frontage of both units to increase attacks / mount attacks, but that would rarely happen in a real game.

We assume our knights get the charge vs halberd knights (this is why I make the calculation with halberds, not lances), and it doesnt matter who gets the charge vs executioners, but we still assume halberds.

Executioners:

Round 1.
8 Front rank + champion, 8 supporting attacks. 17 attacks, hitting on 3+ for 11,33 hits, wounding on 2+ for 9,44 wounds, rerolling 1's, for another 1,57 wounds, totalling 11 wounds. Demigryphon knights have 1+ armor save which is modified to 4+ vs S6, so 5,5 wounds average. That means one dead model on average, sometimes maybe two, but lets assume complete average here and say one dead model. The demigryphons retaliate with 12 gryphon attacks hitting on 4+ for 6 hits, S5 so 2+ to wound for 5 wounds, no armor save so 5 casualties. The knights swing for 5 attacks hitting on 4+ for 2,5 hits, wounding on 2+ for 2 wounds, no armor save so another 2 casualties. Then 4 stomps hit again at S5 for another 3,33 casualties. Total: 10,33 casualties. Demigryphon knights win combat by 4,8, and stand a reasonable chance of breaking the executioners, who will however be steadfast (full front rank, 5 models in the 2nd rank). LD8, 72% chance of holding, 92% with a BSB closeby.

Round 2.
There are 13,67 executioners left. They all attack now, for 14,67 attacks hitting on 3+ for 9,78 hits, scoring a total of 9,5 wounds of which half are saved, so 4,75 wounds inflicted. The demigryphon unit has now taken a total of 10,25 wounds, which means 3 models are now dead. They return a total of 9 S5 attacks and 2 stomps for 5,4 casualties in total, reducing the executioners to 8,27 models and again winning combat by 0,65. I think 2 demis will not remove steadfast from an 8 wide infantry formation, so the same LD test as above applies.

Round 3.
9,27 attacks, 6,18 hits, 6 wounds, 3 saved, for one more dead demigryph. Only the champion now remains, and he striks 5 S5 hits and a stomp for 2,9 casualties on the executioners. Executioners are 5,37 models left, and win combat by 0,1. The demi holds on same LD characteristics as above.

Round 4.
In the fourth round, the 6,37 executioner attacks will deal 3,9 wounds to the last demi, and half of these are saved so the champion has 1,05 wound left now. He again kills 2,9 more executioners and wins combat by 0,95. In the 5th round, the 2,47 remaining executioners (still with champ) should kill the demi narrowly. If they should somehow fail to do so, they will instead be wiped out by the demi, but its a close call.

In other words, executioners will lose 2 combat rounds, which requires your BSB to be closeby or they will break and run half the time in either round 1 or 2. Given a nearby BSB, theres a good chance the two units will just grind each other down, nullifying the threat from both you and your opponent. A good option might be to support the charge with a cloaked up master if you can. He will make short work of demis with his d3 wounds

Now for the knights.

Round 1.
10 knights strike 11 times for 9,77 hits, 9,49 wounds, 4,75 unsaved ones for one dead demi model. In this first strike, the knights thus performs on par with executioners, model kill-wise.
Return attacks see demis perform just as vs executioners, except there are no stomps. 7 wounds inflicted, all S5, so the knights get 4+ armor save and only take 3,5 casualties. 10 cold one attacks then hit 5 times, wound 2,5 times and inflict another 0,41 wounds on the demi unit for a total of 5,16 wounds. Cold one knights win combat by 1,66, and if we assume they got the charge off, 2,66. Which means at LD8, the demis test on 5,34, or an even 5. Reasonable chance of breaking the demis off such a charge. Assuming average rolls, there are 10 ways to come up with 5 or less on 2d6, out of 36 possible outcomes, giving a only 27% chance of succeeding. If we have a BSB nearby, we multiply the chance of making the first roll with the chance of failing the first roll, 10/36 times 26/36. Add this to the chance of making the first roll, you get a 47% chance of making it. So even if a BSB is closeby, 10 knights charging 5 demis should break them more than half the time. Without a BSB nearby, the knights should break them 3 out of 4 times.

Round 2.
In the second round of combat, there are only 6,5 knights left for 7,5 attacks, 6,66 hits but now only S4, 3,88 wounds, at 2+ armor save only results in 0,64 additional wounds. Now even enough to drop one more demi model, on average. The demis thus give another 3,5 casualties to the knights, meaning only 3 are left. Cold ones will then give 0,25 more wounds, meaning at least another demi dies. But knights lose combat by 2,61, and a break test on 6,39 might see them flee. (42% chance of making it, 66% with a BSB or other reroll). In the third combat round, the remaining knights will inflict not even a wound, but will be destroyed by the demis.


In other words: executioners going toe to toe with demis will grind the unit down, but has a risk of breaking along the way (losing 2 combats in a row). Knights will have a super chance of breaking the demis on the charge, or an "okay" chance if the enemy has a BSB nearby. If they fail to do so, however, they will likely be wiped out. Combos exist to make the choice easy, if you can get off shroud of despair nearby, there is no BSB reroll

However, other factors to be considered: Demis cause fear. Knights vs Demis cancel the fear out, but the executioners must pass a fear test every combat, too. Thats a lot of LD tests, and some of them are at risk to fail, which either sends the unit running or reduces WS to 1. Suddenly they hit on 5s, not 3s! Executioners MUST have a BSB babysitting them in order to take this fight.

This same can be said vs most MI and monsters too. Executioners suffer from terror and fear both, whereas our knights are immune to psychology. Knights however depend on getting the charge, so you must play them smartly. And if you get them stuck with a failed charge, they cant flee!

Overall discussion / conclusion:

The analysis is clear. Vs a thought MC situation, executioners must have BSB babysit or they will probably lose the fight. Knights will do OK on their own most of the time, and with support they will do great. (I can try to extend the scenario above to other types of MC and even some MI if anyone would be so kind as to provide stats, frontages etc.)

Vs infantry and standard cavalry, executioners are the unit you want due to KB, but executioners will not catch cavalry unless your opponent makes a mistake. Knights might, and they will still do alot of hurt on the charge.

Vs infantry, executioners will brutally murder most opponents. Anything that strikes before executioners drastically cuts their combat prowess down, however. Knights do not suffer this problem, and cause fear to boot. Figthing large hordes, pick the executioners. Knights can be relied upon to break the formation of most light to medium armored opponents on the charge, unless they have enough models to remain steadfast. E.g. 10 knights vs 25 WS5 T4 3+ armor save infantry, they deal 9,41 total casualties, 15 models will remain which, if they are 5 wide, will remain steadfast. This is the consideration at all times, knights must break or significantly reduce the enemy unit on the charge, whereas executioners can in theory grind it out. Vs low S attacks, knights can also grind it out due to their armor save, but their hitting power is down after first round of combat.

In other words, executioners are a solid allround choice, but vs some of their "specific opponents", monsters / MC they will either have a hard time getting into combat, or will break even. Knights are a shock choice, they hit hard and fast but must break stuff on the charge, and if you pick your target right they will largely manage to do so. They can however fight longer fights vs some enemies.

Both units require you to set your army up accordingly. Knights fit a more mobile list, rich in dark riders or harpies to block or redirect charges directed at the knights, but knights also do well in smaller numbers as flankers or on their own vs mediumsized units, making knights a flexible choice. Executioners fit an infantry based list, they do not care if enemies charge them as long as its in the front, and they can be beefed up with frenzy easily enough. The only situation in which executioners outperforms knights massively is if the unit receives the charge instead of initiating it.



I look forward to a hopefully interesting discussion with the rest of the mathhammer community. And for you guys who have little interest in the more indepth analysis, there are still the above numbers. Feel free to bring them to your games, either on paper or in your head, and use them to decide to charge - or not to.

[T.D.]

Thanks for this thorough analysis and write-up.

One question:

Knights are a chock choice,

Could you clarify this sentence?

Also: I'd like to nominate this thread for sticky-ing/Draich-ing

Cheers,

[Ichiyo1821]

Great topic. I agree with a lot of the points here. Fortunately for me I use both in my 2500 list..

[T.D.]

I use both

This is definitely a good argument for both

[Thraundil]

Both? Show us the list, my precious do you have enough points leftover for artillery and warlocks, too?

"Knights are a chock choice"

Yeah, that one is me typing abit too fast and skipping on the proofreading. It was meant to read shock choice. You buy them as shock cavalry; they hit hard, fast, and whatever they hit is supposed to break and run. Edited OP for the typo, cheers for spotting it

[Calisson]

Against Regular cavalry and infantry, as we have seen, the executioners win hands down due to killing blow.
That single sentences summarizes it all.

executioners would probably be the better choice for longer combats vs T6 up.
... if you don't take into consideration the monster's superstomp.

[Setomidor]

Very interesting comparison, thanks! I run both Knigths and Execs in my current list, only 5 knights (and 30-ish Execs) but I find that both units provide a much needed boost in the high-strength department.

There are some minor discrepancies in the combat vs Demis. Demis will never bring halberds as that reduces their save to 2+ instead of 1+, and the extra Strenght is negligible since the mounts do most of the killing anyway. In your example, you give them both 1+ AS and Halberds. The mounts also have build-in Armour piercing which means the Knights only get a 5+ Save against them.

[Thraundil]

Very interesting comparison, thanks! I run both Knigths and Execs in my current list, only 5 knights (and 30-ish Execs) but I find that both units provide a much needed boost in the high-strength department.

There are some minor discrepancies in the combat vs Demis. Demis will never bring halberds as that reduces their save to 2+ instead of 1+, and the extra Strenght is negligible since the mounts do most of the killing anyway. In your example, you give them both 1+ AS and Halberds. The mounts also have build-in Armour piercing which means the Knights only get a 5+ Save against them.

Whoopsidaisie! My mistake. I'll get to correcting it at a point in the hopefully near future. Thanks for pointing it out.
And sure - halberds are the poor choice considering they have shields. I just too it in the calculation for the sake of giving them the high S, but the mounts are the real danger anyway you're right. (By the way why is it the stupid empire gets triple the CoK punch power for only twice its cost :p MC is stupid)

[Liquidedust]

Very interesting comparison, thanks! I run both Knigths and Execs in my current list, only 5 knights (and 30-ish Execs) but I find that both units provide a much needed boost in the high-strength department.

There are some minor discrepancies in the combat vs Demis. Demis will never bring halberds as that reduces their save to 2+ instead of 1+, and the extra Strenght is negligible since the mounts do most of the killing anyway. In your example, you give them both 1+ AS and Halberds. The mounts also have build-in Armour piercing which means the Knights only get a 5+ Save against them.

Whoopsidaisie! My mistake. I'll get to correcting it at a point in the hopefully near future. Thanks for pointing it out.
And sure - halberds are the poor choice considering they have shields. I just too it in the calculation for the sake of giving them the high S, but the mounts are the real danger anyway you're right. (By the way why is it the stupid empire gets triple the CoK punch power for only twice its cost :p MC is stupid)

CoKs really should have a statline more in line with Black Guard to be honest (if they would retain the S4 I'd say +3~4pt per model otherwise same cost as-is)

[Dalamar]

A few things worth mentioning to this great write up.
Executioners are far easier to have frenzy, either Tullaris or Witchbrew Death Hag.

My frenzied executioners regularly do 12+ wounds on demigryphs (regularly as in two games against empire, once they reduced 4 demigryph unit to one demigryph on last wound, and second time the wiped out 3 demigryphs before those got to attack)

Cauldron of Blood works with both equally well, but can keep up with execs easier.

The second thing is the fact that Execs are infantry and can be better supported by either Cauldron or Shrine.

[Ichiyo1821]

Both? Show us the list, my precious do you have enough points leftover for artillery and warlocks, too?

"Knights are a chock choice"

Yeah, that one is me typing abit too fast and skipping on the proofreading. It was meant to read shock choice. You buy them as shock cavalry; they hit hard, fast, and whatever they hit is supposed to break and run. Edited OP for the typo, cheers for spotting it

I still swap things every now and then but my list is simple.

S Upreme Sorceress dispel scroll opal amulet shadow or dark or Dreadlord on Coldone

CoB Deathag BsB or bsb on peg\ Cold one

20 rxb, musc or 3 units of Dark Riders. 2 with bows 1 naked

30 Witches or Corsairs musc, sb( same points)

11\12 CoK musc, sb
21 Execs musc, sb
4 RBT

5 Warlocks
5 Warlocks
Kbeast
Kbeast

No anvil army all hammers. I use the Fastcav and RBTs to "shape the battlefield" and avoid getting "tanked and flanked". I don't care about steadfast, I just make sure I will always do more wounds than you and just pound the hell out of the opposing unit with sheer wounds dealt. Sometimes I take out 1-2 RBTs for mor Shades or bump the Execs to 30 ish.

All high str units that shoot or smack you. WE for clearing Hordes along with Doombolts and Bladewind. The Warlocks can hold and even kill monsters. Lots of chaff and chaff clearers. I can handle Empire Demigyphs with ease as well as Chaos Monster Mash. Has enough shooting to outshoot HE. My only concerns are heavy warmachine Skaven slave spam and HEAVY shooting Empire gunline.

I want to venture out to more risque lists but I am trying to spread the threat across the army thus I feel very comfortable with both Execs and COK on one list. There are simply situations where the s6kb is better than the lance wielding knights and instances where the movement and 2+as simply outperforms Execs.

[T.D.]

To add some more points to the summary - mobility.

Cold One Knights are move 7" swiftstride (charge 3D6* + 7") = march 14", average charge 15", turn 2 av. threat range: 29"

Cold One Knights are ItP and cannot flee.

Executioners are move 5" (charge 2D6* + 5") = march 10", average charge 12", turn 2 av. threat range: 22"

Executioners can flee.

- Cold One Knights are more likely to choose preferred opponent on the field, more likely to get the charge.
- Cold One Knights can threaten to charge more enemy units simultaneously (attack radius).
- Cold One Knights generally have a smaller frontage and thus ability to manoeuvre around terrain and other units.
- Executioners have the option of fleeing (although high risk), better ability to absorb enemy charges (S6 vs S4, number of attacks, number of wounds, ranks)

Also durability
(points from above example vs MC:)

Cold One Knights are 2+ AS, 10 wound (S4, I6, Ld9 for tests on those stats)

Executioners are 5+ AS, 24 wounds (S4, I5, Ld9 for tests on those stats)


Knights and Executioners have different roles. One is a rapier, the other a battleaxe.
Knights need more support from the rest of the list to be effective, Executioners have more utility vs all comers without support.
Both can be employed together as power hammers in large points games. In smaller games small units of Knights can support Execs well, however the opposite is unlikely as large units of Knights work best with a fast supportive list.

[gerryb56]

Both? Show us the list, my precious do you have enough points leftover for artillery and warlocks, too?

"Knights are a chock choice"

Here's my list with both it's not Character heavy ( It's also Swede comp legal at 10.5 )

Dreadord.......Gen, SDC/HA, Cold One, Dawnstone, Giant Blade, OTS 279

Master..........BSB, SDC/HA, Halberd, Cold One, Ring of Hotek 171

Sorceresss....Lvl1, Scroll ( Shadow ? ) 140


30 Corsairs....FC, Banner of Swiftness 375
5 Dark Riders.....Herald, Mus, Spear, HB 120
5 Dark Riders.....Mus, Spear, HB 110

30 Executioner....... FC,Gleaming Pennant, 395
12 CoK.................. FC, Banner of Eternal Flame 400
3 x RBT 210

2 x 5 Warlocks 250

2399pts

[necrotix]

As we play 3k points around here I'm also happy that I don't have to choose. I just take both, plenty of points for other stuff too!

[Daeron]

A few things worth mentioning to this great write up.
Executioners are far easier to have frenzy, either Tullaris or Witchbrew Death Hag.
...
The second thing is the fact that Execs are infantry and can be better supported by either Cauldron or Shrine.

Yes, but on the other hand... A Dreadlord in a unit of Executioners may be a bit of an odd match, but a Dreadlord (1+AS, Dawnstone, 4+ Ward something) might be an interesting addition to a unit of Cold One Knights. Likewise, a Master on Cold One is a solid upgrade to a unit of Cold One Knights. Combined with a ring of hotek, it might make the unit as a whole more resilient...

It is possible to add such benefits to the Executioners, but the edge is less likely to be felt. The Witchbrew Death Hag is a very good upgrade for the Executioners, but it's also a bit of a one-dimensional upgrade.
In terms of support, I think COKs have a tad more versatility. On the other hand.. I find a solid block of infantry more flexible than a unit of COKs who rely on their speed and target selection to be effective.

As for the numbers presented.. Great Work! I'd love to add more numbers, but I think a few notes could be made without having to go through the whole lot:
- Executioners may score similarly on average in some setups... But they do this with far more attacks. On one hand, this reduces the odds of "one bad roll" to fluff your entire attack. But on the other hand, this means the outcome will "vary" more. The average score is less reliable: you could have more, you could have less.
- As the matchup with monsters shows, the damage is output is quite different depending on the frontage. The 12 COKs can still deliver their entire output on an infantry block of 5 models wide. The only problem with this: which 5-wide units are "not" mass rank and file units that you would want to tackle with Cavalry.


Now you work with averages... and while they are interesting, it might be even better to work with "odds". What are the odds you will win? What are the odds you will loose? Perhaps this might reveal that one unit is steadfast, or breaks steadfast longer than the other.
Unfortunately, this is a difficult computation. I'll see if I can work something out for this.

[Thraundil]

Executioners with death haggish-frenzy is great, but also alot easier to drag around the battlefield... And since I believe the ultrafrenzy which the death hag gets on her own means the entire unit tests with -3 LD (or at least, the DH must test with -3 LD to not charge straight out of the unit!), it is actually not a given that you can prevent the unit from running all across the board. So either that means you must focus on clearing chaff with your, say, RBT's, leaving enemy monsters unchecked, or it means you risk the redirecting circus.

Also, for the price of putting a death hag with witchbrew and maybe a magic weapon into the executioner unit, you can almost add another 10 executioner models. (I dont have my rulebook with me; can you give her multiple gifts?) So the choice is 30 exe with frenzy or 40 exe. Well, you pick the 30 with frenzy, but just its worth considering


And, to the point of CoK buffability and versatility in buffs for them. Toss a BSB in there, stupidity will almost never be a problem now. Toss a magic resistance item on that BSB and the unit is really sturdy also vs high strength magic (infernal gateway, banishments from light covens and that kinda stuff). Of course, going MR on a BSB is risky since in close combat he will lack ward. And since the unit has low attack volume, a master with his 3 attacks bring alot more than a death hag does to an exe horde. But also consider beast signature on a unit of CoK. S7 knights, S5 mounts. Who needs monstrous cav when we have our very own? I've often contemplated trying an "all eggs in one basket" list. often games are played under ETC restriction in my local tourney environment, and under those rules you can have 13 CoK max in a unit. But then add a dreadlord with OTS, 4++, and a BSB with 4++, and then in the 2nd rank a sorceress will ride (just lvl 1 or maybe 2) with lore of beasts. If you want a larger frontage, add more masters with mundane gear, they are actually relatively cheap and will make the entire front rank into 1+ AS models. True MC! Comparable to the warlock deathstar, only a bit more sturdy towards massed attacks with low S.

[Calisson]

(or at least, the DH must test with -3 LD to not charge straight out of the unit!)

It makes no sense.
If the general is around, the DH will test with general's Ld, would'nt her? (it is -3 Ld, not -3 for test result).
Similarly, if there is anyone else in the unit with better Ld, the DH will test with that Ld.
Only if her -3Ld would be the highest available would she test on -3Ld, and this can happen only when her COB has not joined any unit.

So in the hypothetic case of single-frenzied Execs (Ld9) hosting a double-frenzied DH (L6), the DH would test at L9, i.e. same test as Execs, i.e. everybody frenzy-charges or nobody does.


Nevertheless, my interpretation is that if the double-frenzied DH joins a unit of Execs (not frenzied before), the combined unit, including the DH, has only single frenzy.

[Thraundil]

So you're saying that as long as the general is nearby, there is no penalty at all for having superfrenzy, not even in a unit of witch elves with superfrenzy across the board? I hadnt read it that way, but I may very well be wrong. That's happened before at least.

[Vulcan]

I find the whole 'having your frenzied unit dragged all over the battlefield' thing to be vastly overstated. Proper use of chaff (and DE have just about THE best selection of chaff units in the game) mitigates - if not totally eliminates - this problem.

The only time I've had to even make frenzy checks is with tirestrip units of Witches... and as yet, they've never failed to hold on the leadership of the general (with Bsb reroll )in the superfrenzy blocks just behind them.

[Askador]

I find the whole 'having your frenzied unit dragged all over the battlefield' thing to be vastly overstated. Proper use of chaff (and DE have just about THE best selection of chaff units in the game) mitigates - if not totally eliminates - this problem.

The only time I've had to even make frenzy checks is with tirestrip units of Witches... and as yet, they've never failed to hold on the leadership of the general (with Bsb reroll )in the superfrenzy blocks just behind them.

Kinda true. I do not fear Chaff for my Witch block. First of all i have chaff too. I can eigther stop the enemy charging my Unit after they overrun. Or just have a Pegasus infront of the Witches so they dont move that far.
And if i really attack Chaff overrun them and standing in the middle of the battlefield and get charged because my Chaff is sleeping.. im still not afraid.. i already had Chaos Warriors in the flank.
still won by 1 reformed and killed them.
I also had a Stegadon in the flank and Templeguard with slann in the front and still murdered the guard and the Slann.
Once i had 4 Skullchrushers in the flank after i had to overrun. General killed almost 2 of them alone.

In most units, Frenzy is more a debuff then a buff. You are right. But not with a CoB Witch unit with my General inside.
The only way to deal with them is magic or massive shooting.

[ataxia12]

I use both units in my normal list as well. However I run something of a deathstar exes unit with CoK flanking.

The main unit is:

Level 4 Sorceress with sac dagger, talisman(4+) lore of life

Level 4 Sorceress lore of light

Death Hag Rune of Khaine
CoB

Master 1+ AS and Banner of Nagarythe

Tullaris

37 Exes
FC and Banner of Eternal Flame

Basically, they march up the field and can basically take anything that is thrown at them. In one game against daemons and WoC they charged 40 Plaguebearers with 3+ regen (exes didnt care about it). Won combat and faced 18 for next round. Took a daemon prince to one flank, 15 Khorne Warriors to the other flank, and a chimera to the rear. To sum it up, after one round of being surrounded, the exes walked away and my opponent conceded the game.

[Falstaff]

Hi! Nice write-up!

But I think this covers only a comparisson if the CoK got the charge. Executioners do their damage no matter if charged or charging. For CoK this is another story.

Similarly, I'd like to add that 30 wounds for the Executioners are a great Deal more than 12 CoK. This varies however in reference to what is shooting or casting at the units. A Catapult is leathal to Executioners but does only mediocre damage to CoK. Doom Divers eat up CoK while sucking against Executioners. RBT love to flankshoot CoK and will never aim at Executioners. Similarly cannons.


Additonally, I'd like to add, that while CoK seem to be faster at movement 7, this is actually not that much faster. Many cavalry units from other books that hit equally hard are actually faster and thus should usually get the charge against CoK and Executioners alike.

Moreover, the stupidity rule can lose you entire games. I would not play a unit of 10 or 12 CoK without at least the gleaming pennant if not the BSB within the unit.
I used to love CoK and always fielded a unit until I realized that I was losing a considerable amount of games because of failed stupidity checks in important situations.


Thus, I'd almost always go with Executioners!

[Zee Deveel]

Doom Divers eat up CoK

I used to love CoK

Am I allowed to point this out and laugh about it or did the Druchii community get over this joke a decade ago?

A horde of Executioners is pretty unwieldy and will only be able to land all of it's attacks against other wide units. They're also very easy to shoot to pieces so you need a solid strategy for protecting them.... A meaty wall of COKs ?

I think they have nice synergy with each other.

[T.D.]

Thus, I'd almost always go with Executioners!

You are a disgrace to your forum title!


What monofactorial analysis of combat match ups does not represent is the multifactorial nature of the game.

As an example of this, consider the opposition I was facing in the Battle Report on my signature line;

Enemy Battle Line

-------------------------------Warriors/Liche---Archers/Liche----Casket
Necrosphinx---------------Chariots-Horsearchers-NecropolisKnights---Warsphinx


I was confident in this match up, because I knew that my large CoK could penetrate his position (see what you have started, Zee?)...*ahem* I was confident of breaking through his battleline with a Knight charge, using Dark Riders to block his cavalry.

To make this strategy work, I had to (1) take out the Necrosphinx using the rest of my army, otherwise I have a tarpit in the flank destroying my strategy and (2) not get charged by his NK or Warsphinx.

As it happens, I took out the Necrosphinx, but took a flank charge from the NK...and fortunately still won; both that head-to-head and the game.

Now what if I had been playing the equivalents points values of Executioners instead of Knights?

I would have had to (1) take out the Necrosphinx using the rest of my army, otherwise I have a tarpit in the flank destroying my strategy and (2) not get charged by his chariots, NK or Warsphinx.

With the Executioners, (2) is much more difficult due to M6, lack of swiftstride and the footprint and turning circle of the unit. Dark Riders would only have been able to redirect 2 of the three threats, which means high probability of getting charged by one of the above...and as Dark Riders will be crushed, the other two in subsequent turns.

So my Executioners would have been looking at high possibility of (1) chariot attacks and impact hits, (2) NK attacks and stomps, (3) Warsphinx breath weapon, attacks, mega-attack and thunderstomp -- either in successive turns or two of the three at the same time.

Therefore, it is most likely that I would have not been able to break through to the Level 4s behind, and best case scenario would have faced several turns of magic and combat...ergo high probability of loss of game.

Now lets turn the example around:

-------------------------------Warriors/Liche---Archers/Liche----Casket
Necrosphinx---------------TombGuardDeathstar---Warsphinx

What if I had been facing an army of infantry deathstar(s)?

Due to steadfast and step up, Cold One Knights are not likely to be able to break through in one turn, even with a flank charge. The grind of subsequent turns and horde formation are very bad news for them.

Compare and contrast Executioners -- gaining or losing the charge does not really matter due to I5, and they would be able to bring the pain to enemy infantry. Chance of breaking through much higher.


I don't subscribe to the either/or argument of Executioners vs Knights.

The answer is - Both!

& as you can see, performance of these units depends on (A) enemy list and (B) own list.

[Gerner]

Due to steadfast and step up, Cold One Knights are not likely to be able to break through in one turn, even with a flank charge. The grind of subsequent turns and horde formation are very bad news for them.

I actual think Cold One Knights are execellent at grinding at T3 "hordes"/"busses".

Turn x you charge and win by miles. You reform to be as wide as possible after first combat.
Turn x+1 you have 1 attack from rider and 2 attacks from mount, both at S4. Almost as good as Black Guards, but can eat a whole lot more of strength 3/4 attacks because of their AS. Compared against the Executioners who doesn't have re-rolls to hit, and only a single attack by themself, I think the Knights are better.