# Crossbows better than Handguns?



## Words_of_Truth (Sep 20, 2007)

I've got 20 handgunners, but I've been reading that handgunners are distinctly bad now because of their range and the nerf that missile troops in general got, so I was wondering, if is it better if I strip the handguns from them and replace them with crossbows to use as detachments? 

I can only seem to find one sprue from the box but I have 9 sprues of the free companies, which also have crossbows on, so could probably use them.


----------



## khrone forever (Dec 13, 2010)

it depends what army you are facing, if you face elves, empire or OaG then crossbows, if you face heavy armoured troops then handgunners are hte way to go


----------



## Turnip86 (Oct 7, 2011)

Pull the handguns off, find the crossbow arms and magnetize everything. Job done 

Sometimes you'll need the range of xbows and at str 4 they still reduce AS's by 1 but sometimes you'll need the AP and str 4 of handguns to reduce AS's by 2. If you're going to go one or the other I'd think about what you're likely to be facing but if it's a mix then I'd lean towards crossbows because of the longer range and 15" short range which seems to be a little more useful that AP


----------



## Words_of_Truth (Sep 20, 2007)

Shall I split the difference then and keep one as Handgunners and one as Crossbows?


----------



## karlhunt (Mar 24, 2009)

I like to use a unit of hand guns supported by two detachments of crossbows. Crossbows threaten dwarf handgun lines into moving forward which allows the handguns to fire the first volley into them. Alternatly they threaten elves and stuff while the handguns get into position themselves. Finally the extra stand and shoot attacks when the parent unit gets charged are always nice.


----------



## Words_of_Truth (Sep 20, 2007)

If I have 24 Greatswords, 50 Spears, 40 Halbardiers, 10 crossbowmen, 10 handgunners, what would be the best distribution in terms of detachments? I was thinking of splitting the halbardiers up into detachments to.


----------



## Aramoro (Oct 7, 2009)

If I was detachmenting them I would go for 

24 Great Swords
+ 10 Handgunners
+ 10 Crossbows

50 Spears
+ 20 Halbardiers
+ 20 Halbardiers

This being Warhammer what you could do is just make 2 units of 10 Crossbows/Handgunners by making the front rank Crossbows and the back rank handgunners or vice versa.


----------



## Words_of_Truth (Sep 20, 2007)

I found the sprues for the other unit of handgunners, so I can convert them to crossbowmen now, do you think it's worth it? I got 10 outriders which kind of fill the handgunner role now I think.


----------



## jigplums (Dec 15, 2006)

i think crossbows are better, favouring the range over armour piercing. 10 shots that get to shot because of range is better than 10 armour piercing shots that are out of range.

btw what nerf to shooting are you referring to?
Firing in 2 ranks and volley fire were both buffs?


----------



## misfratz (Feb 9, 2012)

jigplums said:


> btw what nerf to shooting are you referring to?
> Firing in 2 ranks and volley fire were both buffs?


I would guess that he is referring to the increase in points cost of the Empire missile troops in the new book, but then the melee infantry also went up in cost, so really this is less of a nerf to missile troops, than wanting to encourage people to use anything that isn't on a 20mm square base.


----------



## karlhunt (Mar 24, 2009)

Let's be honest, it's not to discourage using 20 mm bases so much as it is that with the new infantryhammer rules coupled with the new awesome that is the detachment rule they had to increase points cost to get people to bother with the travesty that is cavalry.

Then again, the look on your opponent's face when you drop a block of 40 knights totally makes up for the fact that the unit is completly unmanageable.


----------



## Words_of_Truth (Sep 20, 2007)

jigplums said:


> i think crossbows are better, favouring the range over armour piercing. 10 shots that get to shot because of range is better than 10 armour piercing shots that are out of range.
> 
> btw what nerf to shooting are you referring to?
> Firing in 2 ranks and volley fire were both buffs?


I read that there was greater negative modifiers to shooting as well as the fact most units are huge now, so shooting doesn't make as much impact.


----------



## Tim/Steve (Jan 25, 2009)

No, there are no new shooting mods but having fewer, larger units means that magic items that hamper shooting are a little more common.
With bigger units shooting finds it harder to massacre enemy units, but massed shooting can very rapidly smash even big infantry blocks... let alone its standard role of weakening enemy units so that your own infantry can kill it (or drop the enemy below steadfast levels).


----------



## olderplayer (Dec 11, 2009)

It is more of an issue as to how many shots you get, what BS, and what strength and AP or not, whether cover is on the table (forests, obstacles, screening units), and what the targets are. In 7th edition where there were a lot more small units where shooting could kill 25% and induce panic tests or cut down a unit or finish off the last remaining models, shooting had more value. But against certain armies in 8th edition, shooting can be very effective. Orcs and Goblins often play units of snotling pump wagons, mangler squigs, and chariots that can hit hard and cut through elite units. Unit of crossbows or handguns against such an army are entirely worthwhile. Also, one should not underestimate the value of shooting in slowly eroding the size of a horde unit to the point that one can finally deal with it once in combat. 

Units that can move and shoot (march and shoot in the case of Empire archers and other skirmishers and fast cav), can be very effective. 

When I play dark elves, I almost always have two units of repeater crossbowmen. They have better BS and two shots apiece from the first and second ranks and, with 24" range, usually get at least two turns of shooting and kill enough to earn more than half their points costs (which is wht one needs) and still can hold something up or act as diverters or even charge some skirmishers. 

When I play Daemons, a unit of six flamers is always one of the best units on the table for the points cost. The ability to march and shoot with S4, flaming attacks, good BS, and D6 shots per flamer is huge. Plus they are skirmishers with decent toughness, a ward save and unbreakable. 

Leadbelchers are another example of a great shooting unit. 

The problem with handgunners and crossbowmen of empire and dwaf armies is that they are move or shoot troops with only average BS. That means that they have to be positioned correctly to anticipate the opponent's units that can be targetted and opponents can avoid being shot by deploying out of range, screening units, and moving out of forward arc for some or all in the units. Since you cannot move and shoot, you have no option of moving forward to get in range to shoot on turn one (especially with handgunners) in many battle scenarioes and cannot turn the unit (using swift stride) to shoot something threatening a flank (like skirmishing scouts and ambushers). That is one of the reasons why I was surprised they increased the point cost of hangunners and crossbowmen, yet they reduced the points costs of archers (which are skirmishers and can, therefore, march and shoot, are harder to hit, have unlimited free reforms, and can wheel as needed). For those reasons, I am favoring running archer detachments (including to hide an engineer in them) instead of handgunners and crossbowmen and using the Hellblaster volley gun (which can pivot to shoot) with an engineer in range as the main shooting option due to the number of shots and hits and strength 5 with AP it provides.


----------

