Do you want to see Knight Titans in tournament 40K?

Mechanical_Knight_by_hgjart

 

The title says it all: at this stage of the game, are you ready for Knights in tournament 40K?

So there are still a lot of unanswered questions with the Knight, but on the surface he seems to be fine to me in terms of balance. He is very powerful (as a 375pt model should be), versatile and reminds me in many ways of the Wraith Knight.

I think unless the new Codex for them is surprisingly clear on some of the many rules issues that have come up, we will have to do some serious FAQ work on them. However, aside from that, I think these big fellas are fun, cool, and shake up the meta a lot. If you had three of them you would be able to do some serious work. It also encourages a bit more diversity in list building, too, in order to plan for them.

I feel that it would also mix up the variety of lists we would see on the tabletop, as well. Armies like IG for example, would really benefit from a model like the Knight.

The only real downside I can see at this early stage, would be the fact that some armies would get overwhelmed by Knights if they didn’t have the tools to deal with them. On the flip side, though, I could see the Knights getting absolutely schooled by armies that had plenty of tools to deal with them. It would be a win big, lose big scenario the more points you invest into them.

Let us know though, how you feel about it at this stage of the game.

About Reecius

The fearless leader of the intrepid group of gamers gone retailers at Frontline Gaming!

149 Responses to “Do you want to see Knight Titans in tournament 40K?”

  1. James Carmona
    kontraktkiller March 4, 2014 8:25 am #

    Knights are fine. Most super heavies are fine……Its the revenant that should be completely removed from the game though.

    • Reecius
      Reecius March 4, 2014 11:48 am #

      Yeah, that and dual Turbo Laser Warhounds, too, as well as a short list of some others. The Rev though, is the worst of the lot.

      • Thomas Reidy
        Goatboy March 4, 2014 12:28 pm #

        I figured we would take it like Magic does – if you see a “bad” unit then maybe we should ban it. But not the entire thing – that is getting dumbs.

        I still think Battle Bros just can only join units from the armybook they were purchased from. It eff’s Inquisition – but when do you see something that isn’t just Coteaz abuse?

        Get in the corner Mr. Coteaz!
        That furry cape is just a Tease!
        I will do with you as I Please!
        And bring the fun to it’s knees!
        And no I won’t eat my Peas!
        Or get out of hanging in Trees!
        Cuz I am Mr. Coteaz!
        And I think Kittens and Puppies are the Bees Knees!

        • Reecius
          Reecius March 4, 2014 1:14 pm #

          Lol, nice one, Goatboy! haha

          Yeah, my thoughts on it are certain, specific bans, not an all or nothing approach.

          I like the Knight, personally, and want to see it used. We just need to try and army of them to see how that goes as it may be overwhelming.

          • Hotsauceman1 March 5, 2014 8:10 am
            #

            If warhounds are banned I would be sad, I always wanted one. Now if a certain type are banned, Im ok with that

          • Hotsauceman1 March 5, 2014 8:13 am
            #

            I think what makes them good, is the fact that they are an allied force. They are NOT Tcked on like Lords of war or formations. So you got a choice, A knight or something else.
            NOW, im nt getting one until FW releases the rumoure add ones. I want a Knight with plasma

  2. Adam
    Adam March 4, 2014 8:25 am #

    Uh oh, it begins… the discussion to ban entire Codecies… even before they’re printed.

    Asking anyone if they’re ready to handle anything new and people are going to say no. Make people have to deal with it, and before long, it’s not a problem. They’re AV13 with a 4+ save, most people focus around killing AV12, mostly with S6/7 firepower. If suddenly those scatter serpents don’t do damage, the player behind it is probably going to say no…

    I checked your rule discussion page, I don’t see which questions weren’t answered?

    • TrueKnight March 4, 2014 9:11 am #

      Whats wrong with having an open discussion about it though? If they decided 1 way without any feedback ud bitch about it. At least they are creating an open forum

      • Adam
        Adam March 4, 2014 10:10 am #

        If the arguement is that a codex should be banned because some builds of some armies aren’t prepared for it, maybe we should be discussing banning Eldar, Tau and Daemons?

        • Thomas Reidy
          Goatboy March 4, 2014 10:13 am #

          That is what I said locally in Austin. If you plan on banning this – then lets ban these other books. Or ban bare plastic on the table tops? Or ban players? Or dice?

          • Adam
            Adam March 4, 2014 10:58 am
            #

            Yeah, it’s getting a little crazy… People want to ban everything that they don’t use. I don’t get knights? Ban them! I don’t get any good dataslates? Ban them too! I don’t like the idea of dealing with a 6 HP vehicle, so BAN THEM!

            Seriously, this is just absurd.

          • BBF March 4, 2014 2:53 pm
            #

            I can live with banning the knight if eldar and tau are both banned as well.

          • Adam
            Adam March 4, 2014 4:39 pm
            #

            For once, I agree with BBF. That should say something, I’m not sure what, but something.

        • Jason
          Raw Dogger March 4, 2014 1:43 pm #

          Didn’t you take on the Revenant Titan and beat it with a tournament list?

          • Reecius
            Reecius March 4, 2014 1:47 pm
            #

            Me? No I have creamed everyone that has tried to beat the Rev, even when they tool their list to fight it. It hasn’t even been close.

    • Reecius
      Reecius March 4, 2014 11:49 am #

      Lol, Tenacious D, why don’t you wait and see what people want BEFORE losing your shit, huh? haha

      • Adam
        Adam March 4, 2014 2:30 pm #

        Scroll down, I wasn’t far off!

        • Reecius
          Reecius March 4, 2014 2:47 pm #

          The general impression I am getting is in favor of them. Are you seeing something else?

  3. Ulrik March 4, 2014 8:28 am #

    Yes. There is NO reason why not. They are fun as hell and cerainly not inbalanced.

  4. ligolski March 4, 2014 8:46 am #

    I think the knights are pretty balanced. In general I think super heavies are fine minus ridiculous ones like the rev. titan, which will not die. I think the knight has the potential to really mix up the meta even if you don’t include stronghold or escalation and I think most armies have methods that can deal with them though I could be wrong. I welcome the change and think tournies should give it a shot!

    • Reecius
      Reecius March 4, 2014 11:49 am #

      Well said, thanks for speaking up!

  5. bigpig March 4, 2014 8:58 am #

    I’d need to play them before finalizing an opinion.

    Personally, I don’t like the idea of superheavies in “regular” 40k games. I think you know what I mean by that before the, “well, learn2play and deal with it cuz thats regular 40k now so you just need to use tactics and stuff” contigent chimes in :). I believe it really pushes more rock/paper/scissors which is not conducive to balance in competitive play.

    That being said, without playtesting against an army full of them I can’t say that limited access to one in an army as an ally is something that can’t be dealt with. Again, I support limited multiple sources for your army (one ally, formation, or dataslate).

    As a nid player, I am obviously limited in my ability to deal with them. Nids would be limited to skyblight with multiple Crones as the only tool maybe address them. It works for one, I doubt it for multiples. Less option for diversity always a bad thing.

    • Reecius
      Reecius March 4, 2014 11:51 am #

      Yeah, trying out multiples of them is a good call as they may just straight up overwhelm some armies. I think the Flying Circus Nid list would do great, though, against multiple Knights. Even in assault you could smash them up as you swing first.

      • bigpig March 4, 2014 11:46 pm #

        I’d have to play it out to see. I really really hate the thought of armies being pigeon holed into one build because of extremes like this. It is the big ends of the pendulum swing which lead to rock paper scissors matchups and unfun play. In a very real sense they reduce the tournament scene to luck of the draw on opponents a lot of the time. Its one thing to select a list which has hard counters, but is a hard counter for other lists, from an otherwise “balanced” (by which I mean more options) and hope you don’t run up against your kryptonite. It is entirely another to allow armies in which are kryptonite to entire codices or which limit codices to one viable build. It kills diversity.

  6. Clover362 March 4, 2014 8:58 am #

    Personally I do not want to see them in tournament play because I just don’t think super heavies or D weapons should be in normal games of 40k. I know GW thinks they should because at the end of the day GW wants us all to play apocalypse so we each by 5000pts worth of stuff.

    IMO the game is pretty balanced and fun in a competitive environment when you say, maximum 2 codex’s per army, 2++ re-rollables become 2++/4++, and riptides can never be joined. If you do those 3 things I think the game becomes pretty well balanced and everyone has a chance for a fun game against whatever gets put down across the table.

    • Reecius
      Reecius March 4, 2014 11:53 am #

      Those are some good points, Clover362, and I agree with the changes you suggest. I think we will be going down that road, honestly. But, I do like the Knights and want to get more feedback and play them some more to get a better feel for it.

    • BBF March 4, 2014 2:55 pm #

      The game is unbalanced now. It always has been too.

    • Black Blow Fly March 4, 2014 4:10 pm #

      At first it was just one thing but now it is three.

    • Hotsauceman1 March 5, 2014 8:16 am #

      Why Riptides never be joined? They are a Single Unit that can make up another unit. It aint that bad

  7. Moridan March 4, 2014 9:02 am #

    No way to make this decision right now without knowing the actual rules within the new codex. Since when is it OK to release a full “codex” for a single model? Bizarre…

    • Adam
      Adam March 4, 2014 10:19 am #

      Rumors have mentioned a few times that the codex makes reference to other knight dataslates. My guess is that those will add more diversity to the army.

    • Reecius
      Reecius March 4, 2014 11:52 am #

      We’re not making a decision yet, just getting the conversation going.

  8. bigpig March 4, 2014 9:09 am #

    Some other discussion the topic if your interested in clicking through. 33 pages so far on how ‘nids can try to avoid being marginalized by these things, especially an army full of them

    http://thetyranidhive.proboards.com/thread/45802/didthe-imperial-knights-nids-army?page=33#page=1

    Very hard to figure out a TAC approach. I link this only to illuminate the RPS effect of an army full of multiple superheavies and as a resource for a discussion that has already been going on.

    • Reecius
      Reecius March 4, 2014 1:48 pm #

      I think you HAVE to allow units to assault the big walkers and tarpit them or it becomes a joke. There are some good points there about a Tyranid specific point of view and how this applies to bugs. You can swarm one or two of them at a time in assault and take them down before they swing, but that leaves you open to a counter punch in a big way.

  9. Painnen March 4, 2014 9:16 am #

    /props up his soap box…

    Get over yourselves people. Don’t like 40k with all it’s stupidly broken rules, units, combos? Well then leave. Door is —–>way. Perhaps Dust tactics or Warmahordes is for you. 40k obviously isn’t. Can’t stomach all the bitching and crying anymore. GW is going to keep pumping out this stuff and you’re going to have to face the facts.

    It does suck that this will be the straw that broke your back but your moaning is ruining the game for people like me that have played for 20+ years and are old enough to live,learn, and accept it.

    I guess this is what kind of society that we have in this generation, you don’t like something, you butch and moan enough about it until 1,000,000 people make allowances and alter the game into an unrecognizable pile of shit. Again, don’t like 40k? Well Reece will sell you some other miniatures instead. GTFO already.

    • ZobieApoc March 4, 2014 2:21 pm #

      I mean this as politely as possible but Painnen you can get in line to get over yourself. After you tell all of us children about your references, you proceed to tell us “STFU Get Out”! Well as someone who is also an Adult and has played for over 20+ years, also worked for the company and was an outrider I think that my opinion is just as valid as yours.

      Yes people will always bitch, but most of the complaints that I have seen recently about GW have been pretty on target. I don’t see anyone talking about banning codexes, or whole books yet, just a few broken things. God forbid Reecius start a discussion about what everyone wants to play with? Guess what he has a lot more to lose when it comes to the happiness of the Majority of the players. Not only in a what can he sell but what is going to drive people away from tournaments. Reecius you walk a thin line and I appreciate you sticking your neck out here for it to be chopped of by haters!

      You think that your tired of hearing people bitch? I’m tired of entitled people screaming at the walls when anyone discusses possible changes to make the game more playable. Just FYI the way to keep a community growing is not screaming at people “Learn 2 Play” “take your ball and go home”. Most of the people who are complaining are doing so because they love the game and it has become harder and harder to find a good game that doesn’t require 6 books and a Ipad to play, and is over in 30 min because someone brought something stupid. Come on trying to explain to prospective players that Army one has Eldar with a DE ally and a Inquisition formation, while army 2 has SM with Tau allies and a random formation. PS Kid you need 2 books + data sates to play, good luck! It sucks and makes it harder to bring in new players!

      Play what you want, but don’t try and run people off, and don’t try and shut down discussion about changes in the game. Contribute something useful or take your own advice.

    • Reecius
      Reecius March 4, 2014 2:48 pm #

      Some pretty aggressive language here, guys. I understand the need to vent at times all too well, but let’s try not to get too inflammatory, please.

      • ZombieApoc March 4, 2014 3:27 pm #

        Reecius if you think it will be a problem please feel free to delete my comment. I re-worded the post twice to try and make sure that it wasn’t a personal attack. I just get heated when people disregard the opinions of others. Discourse about the direction of the game is what is needed, not name calling! Sorry if this creates a problem.

        • Reecius
          Reecius March 4, 2014 3:29 pm #

          No, it’s all good dude. Painnen was clearly venting a bit and used some strong language, so I understand your reaction. You’re good.

  10. TrueKnight March 4, 2014 9:18 am #

    I feel that Knight titans should be allowed, possibly with some tweaks. I think TO’s have every right to pick and choose what they want in their tournament, specific dataslates/supplements and ban others or even more specifically nerf certain weapons or ban certain units

    • Reecius
      Reecius March 4, 2014 1:49 pm #

      Thanks for voicing your opinion. I think you are right on both counts.

    • BBF March 4, 2014 2:59 pm #

      Ban eldar and Tau. The game would be all the better for it.

  11. Baal Viper March 4, 2014 9:21 am #

    I agree with the, lets play test it in casual games first approach. I feel it is always wise to try them out outside of tournaments before adding them into tournamnets. I also am very against the idea of all these huge models in 40k. I already dislike the trend of really big and expensive kits backed up with good rules to drive sales. It takes away from the Meat and Potatoes units of infantry, tanks, and walkers IMO. An army built off 3-5 huge models over simplifies the game, There is little need for Look Out Sir, Squad placement, using cover to hide guys that absolutley must live, etc. I think D weapons should be catigorically banned from tournaments based on the way they function so I personnaly dislike Knights, but can see how a CC only D weapon is much better then D-Pie at range.

    My vote: Treat them exactly as any other Lord of War. If you are allowing LoW in your games then take one, if not, these guys should not get a free pass becasue GW put them in a “Codex,” which is a clear work around to trick people who don’t like Escalation into playing with these.

    People are so hung up on the fact that it is a “Codex,” but it is in name only, and done clearly to circumvent the anti-Escalation elements in the community. If people actually run and entire Knight force it will be really good or bad based mostly on the matchup and mission. It is the pinnacle of one sided lists, I don’t like that and neither will you if you want to be able to play your TAC SM list with 6 Las Cannons and 4 ML in the army for example. This is usually more than enough to take care on anti-tank duties, but not when your going against 4-5 Knights. Your just going to get steam rolled becasue even if you go first you cannot kill 4 Knights in 2 turns before they assault your lines and beat you up, PS they also shoot back pretty well themselves. Not a fun game for any one involved, and again, very little skill, just “shoot the closest big thing and hope it dies before it gets here…”

  12. Reorox March 4, 2014 9:21 am #

    What wrong with paper/rock/scissor match ups. Most competitive games feature this approach and are highly successful. Look at ccg games for instance, many decks are not take all comers decks. Learn to play and stop crying about an army not being able to inherently be able to beat every other list heads up.This is 40k… play the mission and you can beat most armies with any other army. You just cant go head to head with every army and expect to win.

    The knights are balanced with big weaknesses that can be exploited. Just learn to exploit them.

  13. Brakhal March 4, 2014 9:26 am #

    I don’t think knights to be balanced. One of them can be handled, but I think that 3 knights with appropiate support can trash almost every single army without knights. Maybe they’re not cheap, but they are far better in any task given except of taking down flyers.

    If they weren’t scoring units maybe I wouldn’t see them as so broken, just an unpleasant army to play against, because of all their inmunities in combination with a near unstopable CC.

    But, why not in tournaments? Right now the game is as broken to allow everything in any game. Ban imperial knights from tournaments does not solve the problem with fast and tough deathstars accompanied with hight speed scouring/denying units builds. Is not that different to play against a seerstar or a beaststar than to play against 3 knights or even against a revenant: the gaming experience for players that can’t field or don’t want to play that kind of builds is exactly the same.

  14. Slaede March 4, 2014 9:29 am #

    Imperial Knights, yes.

    Lords of War, no!

    • Adam
      Adam March 4, 2014 10:25 am #

      God I honestly really want to see baneblades in 40k… You don’t like Revenants, fine, but I don’t think we should be throwing out the baby with the bath water.

      • Slaede March 4, 2014 12:48 pm #

        I also have no problem with the Baneblade, but I don’t see how you can be picky choosy and pretend to appear even-handed. You either ban all lords of war or none. You ban all formation dataslates or none. You ban all IC’s from joining units from other detachments or none. You don’t single out the ones you dislike the most because it gets absurdly complex

        • Reecius
          Reecius March 4, 2014 1:34 pm #

          I actually disagree on that point. I think you can pinpoint the key units that cause the most problems without getting absurdly complex.

          You target only those unit interactions which cause problems that go beyond what is reasonable to deal with. For me, there are really only a few things you would need to do.

          Don’t let the Baron join Eldar units.

          Don’t let the Buffmander use more than one signature system a turn.

          Don’t let ICs join Riptides, other than Ovessa who is an IC.

          Don’t let Certain Lords of War in, such as the Rev, etc. A very short list of the most abusive Lords of War.

          Nerf the 2+ saves.

          Limit any list to two sources only, formations count as a source and do not allot the Tau formation, Inquisition counts as a source, etc.

          That limits the amount of craziness. Now, that isn’t a complete list per se, but I think that limits most of the insanity and is an easily managed list of additional rules.

          • Slaede March 4, 2014 2:24 pm
            #

            But see, you’re already behind the power curve.

            The army that won TOF invitation had Tigurius joining two bikemasters and four Dev Cents giving them TL ignores cover large blasts at AP2 with hit and run.

            And you haven’t anticipated what madness the new IG will bring. Tau should be the least of anyone’s worries at this point. With Space Marine stars like that floating around, they’re a few months away from irrelevance. Good for smashing average players, but obsolete at the high end.

          • Reecius
            Reecius March 4, 2014 2:45 pm
            #

            I don’t think the Centurion Deathstar was abusive, personally. Just because something wins an event doesn’t mean it is broken. And that combo does not have Hit and Run, FYI.

            I would much rather play whack-a-mole with abusive combos as they come up than ban everything, personally. To me, that is for more enjoyable than simply saying everything is out, which kills a lot of fun and variety along with the relatively smaller group of abusive stuff.

          • Slaede March 4, 2014 2:25 pm
            #

            The point is you can’t possibly anticipate all the abuses clever players will come up with, so it’s a lot simpler to restrict the most abusive things as a category.

          • Reecius
            Reecius March 4, 2014 2:50 pm
            #

            It is simplest, true, but it also comes along with a lot of unintended consequences that are negative, IMO. I think the better route, but more difficult route, is to go through them case by case.

          • Adam
            Adam March 4, 2014 2:58 pm
            #

            Yeah, i’m actually with reece on this one, that unit is far easier to put wounds onto than a unit of 2++ jetbikes, in addition it’s much slower and doesn’t have hit and run. I’d rather face that list than a seerstar any day of the week.

          • Reecius
            Reecius March 4, 2014 3:05 pm
            #

            Me too. I think it is imperative though, that we vote to allow these things to get tar pitted by units that can’t hurt them like Gants and such or some armies will be royally fucked.

          • Hotsauceman1 March 5, 2014 8:49 pm
            #

            Reece, I think singuling out certain armies is a very bad idea. It opens the flood gates for ALOT of problems

        • BBF March 4, 2014 3:02 pm #

          That is a dumb point of view. Just remove the problem units. Solved. A lot of people would probably be happier still playing fifth edition… Hint hint .

          • Reecius
            Reecius March 4, 2014 3:06 pm
            #

            No reason to say someone’s idea is dumb, BBF. I see his point, I think it is just too heavy handed.

  15. Jay March 4, 2014 9:58 am #

    I think they would be good for tournaments. They would start to balance the game out. I also would like to see major events using lower point Lords of War units. You could use the knight titan as a reference. For example maybe events let in all lords of War under 400 points.

    I really think the variety in the game will start to make it balanced.

  16. Baal Viper March 4, 2014 10:04 am #

    Tournaments could adopt the 30K LoW solution where LoW cannot comprise more then 1/3 of your points. That is a simple fix, that is already in print, and would open up a huge range of options without letting in the really crazy stuff. THough I would advocate the ratio be 1/4 instead of 1/3.

    • Adam
      Adam March 4, 2014 10:13 am #

      Unfortunately most armies don’t have access to LoW which are under 437 points (25% of 1750), and many don’t have any under 583 points, even including FW.

    • Reecius
      Reecius March 4, 2014 11:56 am #

      The only problem with that is that some of the lower point LoW units are still incredibly powerful.

  17. Chosen of Khorne March 4, 2014 10:15 am #

    I would worry about how some armies would deal with 5 of these as an army by itself. If they are scoring as a primary detachment as rumored, how will daemons or orks deal with that many? Flying into melee with a 6 wound/hull point model with a d weapon might be a way to kill one, but how about the other 4 when you FMCs gets squished by a D attack on the counter charge.

    One is probably reasonable. But if you open the doors, how many will stop at one? The codex will clarify some of the this week.

    • Reecius
      Reecius March 4, 2014 11:56 am #

      Agreed, when you have 3+ of them, that can get loopy.

      • Slaede March 4, 2014 12:53 pm #

        Over at the Daemon blog we say bring on five Knights! Just stop banning Be’lakor!

        • Reecius
          Reecius March 4, 2014 1:39 pm #

          We are letting Be’Lakor in going forward, he just got the ban hammer at first due to it being too much too soon for tournaments that were close to the release date.

  18. Dash2021 March 4, 2014 10:19 am #

    One or so knights in a army isn’t unbalanced at all. They are balanced for their points. An entire army of knights is extremely unbalanced, but as we are all obviously aware at this point GW doesn’t care one rat turd about balance. As has been stated numerous times, a codex allowing multiple knights is pretty obviously designed to shove escalation down everyone’s throat. Utilizing extremely unbalanced ant-armor only selections for all of your heavy support slots MAY get you a knight a turn killed. By turn 2 you can very easily be in HtH with two undamaged knights, and have no recourse. Unless you bring your own super heavy…..

    Also, I’d like to point out something about the knight vs other super heavies that I’ve noticed has made his reception much more warm: no ranged D. Thus far, a lot of the conversation has been about how stupid broken D is but I don’t think that’s necessarily accurate. RANGED D is stupid broken, as it requires 0 risk on the part of the user. With the wide availability of prescience you can make a hit virtually guaranteed, making wounding the only thing between you and wiping out a target w/ no effort.

    Melee D is another game all together. As implemented on the knight you have to expose yourself to a high level of risk to use it, and even then it will only be in play from turn 2 on (at the earliest). Even then it only gets to blow up 4 targets a turn, and it has to hit before it can do that. It’s a powerful death star killer (as it should be), but balanced against most “normal” assault units.

    TL:DR- One knight in an army is good, and adds variety to the game. Multiple knights (ala the codex) is going to force escalation on us whether we want it or not. Lets just prepare for that eventuality by toning down ranged D weapons (AP1 STR 10 Ignores cover, D3 wounds per model under template- or something along those lines). Melee D isn’t a huge deal in the long run, it’s 0 effort long ranged D that I think most of us don’t want to see.

    • Reecius
      Reecius March 4, 2014 11:57 am #

      Some good points Dash, and yeah, ranged D is a bit too much, IMO. Units like the Shadowsword…maybe, but the Rev? Hell no.

  19. bugsculptor March 4, 2014 10:29 am #

    I strongly disagree with any plans to ban knights. They’re a new, interesting codex for the game shipped alongside a set of awesome models. We should be letting off fireworks, not talking about running games without them.

    Balance has been all over the place all the way through 6th edition… but really the game has never been more fun. Knights don’t even seem OP like some of the existing codices, so why are we even talking about this?

    • Reecius
      Reecius March 4, 2014 11:58 am #

      We are talking about it because it opens the door to an entirely new army type we have never seen before that has some incredibly powerful weapons that will change the game.

      • Adam
        Adam March 4, 2014 2:32 pm #

        Is that a bad thing? Tau and Eldar have both introduced incredibly powerful units that have changed the game.

        • Reecius
          Reecius March 4, 2014 2:46 pm #

          Apples and Oranges, my friend. This is altogether new.

          And again, lol, I am in favor of Knights. I just want everyone to be able to voice their opinion.

      • Black Blow Fly March 4, 2014 4:16 pm #

        Come on Reecius… This is sixth edition. It’s not any worse than a Riptide or Wraithknight.

        • Reecius
          Reecius March 4, 2014 5:18 pm #

          I agree for now, but I want to try an army of these things before passing judgement.

  20. RyanL March 4, 2014 10:33 am #

    I’d like to see some competitive playtesting against knight armies using a force that a top player might bring to a competition which includes knights.

    The last playtest was pretty casual (which was cool, it’s how the majority of people will use them) but I’d like to see how they fare vs, say, the ravager spam deldar army that’s been used against the baneblade or the taudar army.

    Just need to find someone willing to buy and build 4 or 5 of them!

    Of course, allowing Knights into a tournament would be the best and very aggressive, no holds barred playtesting available!

    • Adam
      Adam March 4, 2014 10:53 am #

      Should we have competitive play testing before we allow other codexes? Would Tau or Eldar have passed that test?

      • RyanL March 4, 2014 11:29 am #

        I’m not saying that the playtesting should decide if it should be allowed or not, only that I’d like to see it! 🙂

        Personally, I’m all for letting everything (Knights, Escalation etc.) into tournaments and see who comes out the other end in one piece but there’s no loss from seeing play tests.

        Though, you must admit, there’s no denying that the Knights codex is a /very/ different beast to any codex we’ve seen before (I say without having seen the codex of course, but everything suggests it’s going to be quite unique).

  21. winterman March 4, 2014 10:35 am #

    I am hesitant about letting them in if (and only if) you are banning LoW and/or dataslates — or in other words just because its a ‘codex’ doesn’t mean its above the same scrutiny as Escalation, Stronghold Assault and dataslates, no matter how balanced it may seem. Its basically a unit dataslate with a warlord chart and ally chart, that doesn’t make any more valid then the Tyranid dataslates, Belakor, or even the much maligned Tau Firebase.

    Beyond that I think they will prove to be better then people give them credit for, as long as they are taken as part of another army. IG seems like a great fit by providing anti-flyer, bubblewrap, etc.

    • Adam
      Adam March 4, 2014 10:54 am #

      Why hold only one codex to that scrutiny?

      • winterman March 4, 2014 11:22 am #

        Because it contains the same thing as LoW that is already banned?

      • bigpig March 4, 2014 11:47 pm #

        because no other “codex” has superheavies as their default units.

    • Biodon13 March 4, 2014 2:41 pm #

      I totally disagree…it is absolutely not like any of the dataslates any more than the Space Marine Codex is like the dataslates. It is a codex…full on, hard backed, expensive assed codex. As such, it deserves the same scrutiny as other codex and no more. Until the Eldar codex or the Necron codex is banned, I don’t think that this is even a proper discussion.

      • winterman March 4, 2014 4:12 pm #

        Once you start banning stuff then why stop at a Codex just because its a codex. That’s my point.

        LVO banned all the dataslates and escalation. In that meta letting a full codex of super heavies in is possibly a very bad idea.

        If you don’t want to ban stuff then by all means let it all fly.

        But don’t try and sell me a load of bull that Imperial Knights have more right to be allowed at an event then a Hieropant, or a Tyranid formation or any host of other items that are bought payed for, built and painted — just because GW happend to throw in a warlord trait together with two unit entries and called it a codex.

  22. jy2
    jy2 March 4, 2014 11:17 am #

    I’ve got no problems with them. With a couple of FAQ’s to clarify a few issues, I really don’t see them as OP at all but rather, a nice variety to the game.

    Unfortunately, it seems that this is the route that GW is going – with Super-heavies and D-weapons in regular games – and we are all going to need to learn how to deal with it.

    • Reecius
      Reecius March 4, 2014 12:00 pm #

      Accept them or reject them. Those are our options. GW just wants us to buy models, they don’t seem to care one iota about the balance of the game.

      • Dr.insanotron March 4, 2014 12:26 pm #

        Then you would have to ban Eldar as well. They are every bit as bad to deal with as the knights if not more so

        • Reecius
          Reecius March 4, 2014 1:42 pm #

          The conversation is about what people want to use, so let’s try and not go down the rabbit hole right out of the gates, right? haha, I just want to get feedback on where people are at on this subject at this point in time.

      • Black Blow Fly March 4, 2014 4:19 pm #

        They never have Reecius.

  23. Bill Castello March 4, 2014 11:28 am #

    For tournament gaming, I would have to vote yes, to allow them. I don’t see them as terrifically unbalanced as they stand now, although the move through cover debate needs to be addressed. They are relatively balanced in the points department, I think and they might provide some very nice punch in some builds that need it. I can see them throwing a wrench into some ‘all comers’ lists and maybe even star-busting?

    v/r
    Bill

  24. Pascal Roggen March 4, 2014 11:35 am #

    yes please, knights ahoy! 🙂

  25. Chris March 4, 2014 11:39 am #

    Three words: BRING THEM ON!

  26. MVB March 4, 2014 12:01 pm #

    When you start playing serious games with these suckers, as with the lords of war, the wheels start to come off.

    Not that they are entirely on the game right now anyway, but …

    Chuck another penny in the bucket of wishing GW would pursue the more fiscally profitable course of creating an environment in which all units and model types are recognizably within the general area of balanced and fun to play with. In light of all that, might not really matter whether you use them or not.

    That said, I think people should start playing with max tricked armies using 1-5 knights against a wide variety of builds before swagging guesses at whether they’re totally OK or not. This is inclusive of me, as I’ve only gotten a little bit of play under my belt with them.

    • Ulrik March 4, 2014 1:36 pm #

      “That said, I think people should start playing with max tricked armies using 1-5 knights against a wide variety of builds before swagging guesses at whether they’re totally OK or not.” – You mean like ***-stars? 🙂

      OK, more seriously and not just classic “but 2++ is OK, right?” (despite fact I think its much worse evil than melee D weapons). 5 Knights can be hard to take. Certainly. But, in my opinion thats many armies and it should be. When you see army “hey, I can wipe it, maybe even alpha strike”, its wrong and honestly its not fun.

      Question is – are 5 Knights too much to bear? IMO not. They are huge, you practically cant deny LoS. They are AV13/12/12, their 4+ invul works only in 1/4 directions. They are really vulnerable to flyers, high S Barrage (drop it between them, use it to overpass their Ion Shield) etc. And when you destroy them, they go with Big Bada Boom which in 5 Knights can easily hit another one. BIG Bada Boom.

      So, if you list cant copy with AV 12 in bigger numbers, its strange and probably not good build or rather build made for certain, narrow meta. Of course, it will need some maneuvers, but when you got those higher S weapons from two sides, Ion Shield is useless (even in work it stops just 50% of shots). You can tarpit them and use flyers, deep strikers to outflank.

      Is it easy? Definetly no. Will you take losses. I guess that you will. But its just 5 scoring units at best, almost always in LoS and with average saves and average armor. When dedicated AT units strikes, worst problem is that 6HP and even those can be stripped fast with Melta and friendly dice gods 😉

      Dunno, for me its rather challenge (and fun!) than desperation “oh my, it will be boring” which is case of many other “highly competetive” armies. IMO are Knight more vulnerable than people guess. Its just those big shootaz and D choppa that makes them so intimidating.

    • Reecius
      Reecius March 4, 2014 1:46 pm #

      Hey Mike, and yeah, I agree. We need to play more to get it worked out, I was just curious to gather first impressions. So far though, folks generally seem to be very open to them.

  27. joe twocrows March 4, 2014 12:10 pm #

    Use ’em.

  28. Oadius March 4, 2014 12:24 pm #

    We need to ban the Sisters of Battle Codex too. Women in war?! really? let’s just ban it on principle. Then let’s ban Orks because……well because, oh, oh and let’s ban White Scars because it’s sounds racist and lamenters because that names gets me down. Shall we ban tournaments too and then we can ban banning but it’ll be too late. Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban,Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, BAn, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban,Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, BAn, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban,Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, BAn, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban,Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, BAn, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban,Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, BAn, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban,Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, BAn, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban,Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, BAn, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban,Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, BAn, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban,Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, BAn, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban, Ban,

    • Reecius
      Reecius March 4, 2014 1:40 pm #

      OK, got it, Mike votes for a ban! lol

  29. Crispy March 4, 2014 12:33 pm #

    Personally I don’t think the knights should be banned if they receive a full codex as has been rumoured etc.

    I’ve used my stompa and had 12 hull points dissappear quite quickly from Terminators with chain fists, drop pods with melta gun dudes etc. The same will happen to the knight, only quicker and being 375pts means its quite an investment to lose possibly turn 1 to drop pod melta gun wielding space marines.

    Also its going to make the tournament battlefields look awesome!

    • JC March 4, 2014 1:06 pm #

      Exactly, 2 ‘explodes’ results can make 6 hull points disappear in a hurry. Can I make 6 wounds on a Wraithknight disappear that quickly? No.

      • Reecius
        Reecius March 4, 2014 1:20 pm #

        Yeah, but the odds of that are 1/36 though, not exactly likely =)

        • RyanL March 4, 2014 1:23 pm #

          As likely as wounding a unit with a 2+ rerollable save? 😉

          • Reecius
            Reecius March 4, 2014 1:38 pm
            #

            Lol, exactly!

            But in fairness, with melta and such, the odds go way up, but it isn’t super likely to happen, especially with a 4++ save.

          • Adam
            Adam March 4, 2014 2:34 pm
            #

            So then that’s the odds of killing 1 whole screamer, instead of just wounding one? haha

    • Reecius
      Reecius March 4, 2014 1:40 pm #

      It will make the tournaments look awesome, I agree.

      And everyone keeps saying Drop Pod melta Marines are somehow the silver bullet to these things, but it isn’t true, lol. You would need like 6+ melta guns in a unit to reliably take this thing down and that is with some good luck, too.

      • Adam
        Adam March 4, 2014 2:35 pm #

        But killing a 375 point unit in a single volley isn’t something most units should be able to do reliably.

        • Reecius
          Reecius March 4, 2014 2:45 pm #

          I agree. My point was that it wasn’t easy to do, as some people want to make it sound, lol.

          • Adam
            Adam March 4, 2014 4:42 pm
            #

            Ah, well it’s not easy, though arguably easier than it should be… At least it’s not both easy and worth bonus VP’s, then knights would just be utterly garbage.

      • Crispy March 4, 2014 3:27 pm #

        I’m only mentioning those cause they’ve put the pain on my stompa a few times.

        Thing is tough and is going to need some special attention no doubt, but I think that at 1750 you’ll have more then a few tools at your disposal to get him down.

        I mean your scarab tactic was pretty good. Admittedly it should have killed more bases, but you still would have held him there for 3 turns and after that the gauss probably would have finished him up.

      • JC March 4, 2014 4:37 pm #

        10 Sternguard with combi-meltas in a Drop Pod, combat squad so if the first half fails the second half can finish. Also with 6″ disembark they can possibly pincer to 2 facings, reducing the effectiveness of the Ion Shield.

        • Adam
          Adam March 4, 2014 4:42 pm #

          We can’t have things like Pod Marines and Chaos Termicide units have a place in the game, now can we?

          • Reecius
            Reecius March 4, 2014 5:20 pm
            #

            It’s not that simple, Adam, and you know it. You can’t simply propose a solution for a few armies in a vacuum and say that is game, set, match.

          • Adam
            Adam March 4, 2014 9:50 pm
            #

            Haha, I was mostly just referring to the unit he suggested and the first similar unit I thought of.

        • Reecius
          Reecius March 4, 2014 5:19 pm #

          That is a 300pt suicide unit, though. Lol, I don’t want to have to take something like that to have a balanced game is my point.

          • ligolski March 4, 2014 7:32 pm
            #

            Im confused by why this is a problem. To me that is a sign of a shifted meta and the need to take into account new things. Its absurd to say that I wont allow knights vecause I need to use unit x and that happens to cost a bunch of points. Thats the game…when we shifted to 6th edition we switched to more anti infantry…now we would need to account for a tougher vehicles essentially…great! We now need even better TAC lists. Each army has options and if somehow you dont then you can take allies, dataslates etc. All the craziness gives us options and there are a ton of them!

            I play DE and one of our best AT units are haywire wyches…generally a suicide roll but really effective. I just dont understand why that would invalidate knights.

  30. GDT March 4, 2014 1:08 pm #

    I think a lot of people are taking the whole “we MUST balance it OURSELVES!” thing a whole lot more dramatically than it sounds.

    So the game is unbalanced, and you guys addressed that in…a hamfisted way. I won’t lie that’s how it feels to me. (Note: This an OPINION on the INTERNET which you don’t have to take SERIOUSLY about toy soldiers).

    When the first ban lists were being thrown out, all of it was directed at Screamerstar. Which, honestly? That gave me the impression of this: Frontline gaming likes Taudar a lot, they love Eldar a lot. But Daemons? God no! Kill that off! But those counters? D weapons? They counter Eldar and Taudar too? BAN THOSE! To the lab! Fabricate an opinion which the internet MUST follow.

    I’ve done a lot of thinking and this whole “Game is unbalanced” aspect….it’s not just GW at fault.

    It’s yours. The Blogosphere. Think about it, where do a lot of people go to read 40k? The blogosphere. And where does most the talk of “Whining and OP” happen.

    You guessed it.

    The blogosphere has a problem, and it’s the fact that it’s so focused and hellbent on what seems to me, in my, you guess it. Opinion. Taking the fun out of 40k and replacing it with a sports mentality. You know the type, the one which involves wearing the “Team” shirt and getting pissed off when your team loses, do we want to go there? I mean whats the point?

    Next we’ll have internet nerd rage televised as a Sitcom comedy, as little Jimmy and his Space marines hardest battle won’t be who he’s facing, but how much internet rage he has absorbed and is willing to use as a weapon!

    It’ll have a flashy logo and commentators too. It’ll be immense.

    On Knights, let them stomp the crap out of people, a fully painted knight force will look awesome. We can all agree there at least…. guys?

    Guys? Oh…you’ve got the pitchforks….

    • Reecius
      Reecius March 4, 2014 1:26 pm #

      Venting a bit? Lol, but no, no pitchforks here. We encourage people to speak their mind so long as they are being respectful.

      But, I think you are confused on some facts. We never put any bans in place to hurt the Screamerstar or Daemons specifically, what made you say that? Feast of Blades was talking about banning the Grimoire, but that was not us. We nerfed the 2+ reroll save which impacts all armies equally.

      And you think people only whine on the blogosphere? As in, no one whined about 40K before blogs? I find that a rather hard story to accept, sir! haha

      I think you just perceive it that way, but clearly it is not true. All the blogs did was allow a larger audience.

      • GDT March 4, 2014 1:32 pm #

        I think I did confused Feast with the LVO so that’s fair there. My fault entirely.

        There is some venting going on I won’t lie, it just feels like a contributing issue which is hitting the community harder, the whining is easier to find due to the popular blogs (I know this sounds like a punch at your direction but it’s not the intent!)

        Some of the more recent posts I’ve seen on the blogosphere are so doom and gloom it makes me wonder “Why am I reading this”, and then I think “Wait…I am reading this…damn I’m a hypocrite now!”

        It’s a personal perception on it all, I’m happy to be proven wrong! I enjoy the game for what it is. I’ve stayed quiet and just wanted to throw my opinion at a comment section for once. Even if it is a wrong one!

        • Reecius
          Reecius March 4, 2014 1:37 pm #

          No worries dude, we all love the hobby so our emotions get involved with it. I complain a lot when I think something is poorly done on GW’s part, so I know I contribute at times. But, I also praise when things are done right, too. We just try to be honest here at FLG, which at times can seem negative.

          But feel free to voice your opinion, you are being reasonable even while venting so its all good! haha

          And we will find a middle ground that makes things enjoyable to play and fair, it just takes time and talking about as we are all doing here.

  31. Jason
    Raw Dogger March 4, 2014 1:47 pm #

    That shit tears it! I’m going to play Warzone! WHO’S COMING WITH ME?

    • Reecius
      Reecius March 4, 2014 1:51 pm #

      Me!

      But I will still play 40K, too, lol!

  32. Noah March 4, 2014 2:15 pm #

    The only thing im concerned about is that if the Codex doesn’t have the rules for Stomp etc. then you would have to use the rules from Escalation. If you allow a little bit of Escalation then I think you would have to allow all of Escalation otherwise you’re just nitpicking what is wanted from everywhere.

  33. Charles March 4, 2014 2:28 pm #

    Yes I have made a wraith night disappear to one units shooting. Can also make the knight disappear to one units shooting as long as I get six sixes out of 10-15 wound dice, with re-rolls.

    I like the idea of the stuff being let in and changes Reecius has mentioned. You did forget making all battle bros allies of convenience though.

    That being said I’d have to say D shooting weapons might be a bit to much. A D chain sword, well that’s not so bad when it’s only 3 attacks, with a chance to roll a one.

    There’s stuff that’s good and stuff that’s stupid, we as a community just needs to edit what we want and flush the rest. Easy peasy.

    I’m in……

    Chas

  34. Biodon13 March 4, 2014 2:32 pm #

    Once the official codex is released, I don’t think this should be a discussion…unless we are going to ban the Eldar Codex…and the new IG codex if people think it presents too much a challenge…period.

    • Reecius
      Reecius March 4, 2014 2:42 pm #

      That’s not really the argument here. It is more because of the D weapons and other rules specific to Super Heavies. Comparing them to Eldar is apples and oranges, honestly.

      That said, I am in favor of the Knights at this point in time.

      • dr.insanotron March 4, 2014 2:46 pm #

        I dont think it is. Your asking about banning a codex because it might have things in it that are to powerful. The same could be said for the Eldar codex because it has even more powerful things in it. Thats apples to apples

  35. Jay Pena March 4, 2014 2:41 pm #

    I think we might have one or two @ our next Red Star Gaming event. We were the first in San Antonio to have an Escalation tournament & the people who did show up had lots of fun.

    • Jay Pena March 4, 2014 2:42 pm #

      Imperial knights should be no different.

    • Reecius
      Reecius March 4, 2014 2:46 pm #

      Which is great, but I think the key is that you had an Escalation event. People knew what to expect.

      • Jay Pena March 4, 2014 2:54 pm #

        True. I’m taking a poll on our page right now to see how people fell about it. So far we only have three that have responded, but those “three” don’t mind.

      • Jay Pena March 4, 2014 2:57 pm #

        Our next event is April 5 & if enough people say yes, then the Knight can be fielded and if not…maybe next time. No rush.

  36. Knight of Infinite Resignation March 4, 2014 2:49 pm #

    These models will just lead to more listhammer. I don’t want the game decided before it even begins because of a bad matchup, but the fact that it is currently impossible to construct a Take All Comers list in 40K means goodbye to actual ‘in game’ tactics and hello to playing the ‘meta’.

    Its boring and doesn’t make for fun games. Almost everyone has stopped playing 40K round here which goes to show what a great success flyers-allies-dataslates-super-heavies-fortification-hammer has been.

    • Jay Pena March 4, 2014 3:06 pm #

      I’ve been playing this game for 16 years & it is not the same game it was back then. I love playing this game & you know what l think…if this game didn’t change people would hate the fact that it’s the same old game. You can always play a friendly with your buddies and that’s fine, don’t take all the “crazy” options. But, when you go to a tournament you go to play the”best” & people will play what they think is going to win. But l think we all know that doesn’t always work.

    • Reecius
      Reecius March 4, 2014 3:17 pm #

      I hear you, and a lot of people share your feelings, unfortunately. A lot of folks have walked away from the game in the past 6 months for similar reasons to those you state here.

      However, I think 6th has the potential to be the best edition of the game yet by a mile. It will just take some coming together as a group to decide what we want to use.

      • Jay Pena March 4, 2014 4:49 pm #

        I hate to see people turn away from a game that is so awesome. I do agree that the community has to decide what is acceptable for their community. Great stuff came out in 6th. Overwatch for one. I remember how badass being able to run in 5th was. In a White Dwarf issue back during 4th they came out with rules to make your own flyer that could only be hit on “6s”. But, who knows what the future holds.

  37. Crispy March 4, 2014 4:53 pm #

    Rather then banning things, you could do a similar thing to the Swedish comp system for fantasy? Here is a link to it.

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/5qs3t67yswnkpk4/Swedish%20Comp%20System%20v1.11.1.pdf

    I went to a fantasy event and it really did make a difference. People with balanced lists were rewarded, those with broken ones penalised a little.

    • Adam
      Adam March 4, 2014 5:13 pm #

      The only thing worse than comp in 40k is the comp in Fantasy.

      If people actually used swedish comp for it’s intended purpose, but nowadays people just use it to restrict army composition.

    • Reecius
      Reecius March 4, 2014 5:21 pm #

      I am familiar with Swedish comp and it may very well have a place. That though, is kind of the same thing as targeted bans as if you score low enough on the comp system, you lose the event.

      Plus that means going through each list and scoring it, getting it back from the players, etc. It is a PITA.

      • Crispy March 4, 2014 5:30 pm #

        No worries, just throwing it out there :).

        With the event I went to, it was up to the players to double check that the points were done correctly and they received an extra few pts towards their overall score.

        • Reecius
          Reecius March 4, 2014 5:32 pm #

          See, I can live with that. My only concern is that in a big event it gets hard to manage.

  38. Brian March 4, 2014 5:23 pm #

    Couldn’t agree more, melee D weapons don’t bother me at all, since, if you don’t want your stuff to be one shot, you can play keep away, and it’s tactical about if you’re better about keeping away until you can kill it or if he’s better at trapping you into an assault. Long range D is just crap, as it stands, both competitively or as a hobbyist. it allows your opponent to simply decide he doesn’t want to deal with something and remove it, instead of playing against it. Its even worse if you happen to like playing with expensive, themed units, Aesthetically my favorite models in the entire 40k fluff are sanguinary guard or deathwing knights, neither of which there would ever be a point fielding against anything that can just delete them from the tabletop no matter what you try to do. If i were to change the D, it would be str 10, Ap 2, if you roll a 6 to wound, they have super rending that would remove the models from the game with no save.. That way, it keeps those 2++ deathstars honest, knowing they aren’t completely invincible, but it’s unlikely enough that it can still be opposed.
    I hope someone fixes the D, because I honestly like the thought of those big models on the table top.

    • Reecius
      Reecius March 4, 2014 5:34 pm #

      I think you summed it up, well. I would like to use the big models, too! Just not at the cost of a fair competition.

  39. dr.insanotron March 4, 2014 5:51 pm #

    Here is a interesting side note. I would seem that Vector strikes would ignore the Knights ion Shield. Witch would make the Crone pretty good at fighting it

    • Reecius
      Reecius March 4, 2014 6:15 pm #

      Yeah, Crones would also be able to hit it with their Haywire missiles, too. Crones would be the Nids best bet against this big guy.

  40. BBF March 4, 2014 6:42 pm #

    We can do each codex unit by unit. Yes Escalation and SHA were terribad but come on you have to accept new things. I think this will end up biting you in the arse.

  41. Rawrgyle March 4, 2014 11:16 pm #

    Plain and simple, my tau lists (which don’t have more than 2 riptides) will all be switching over to missile spam. 80+ shots in an 1850 – 2k list all str 7, some of it mobile some of it twin linked… whatever… I will bring stuff down in just shear weight of fire. If I am being forced to face super heavies like this or horde armies, I will be that guy in pick up games at the local Game Store. Or even the local tournies. So until people start adding in more terrain – specificly LOS blocking terrian for wahtever normal units may be left, this is something my local meta hasn’t done, I’m sorry nids, looks like you get to wait until next edition, I really don’t think you have any chance against multiples of these guys.

    GW is just sliping in a codex to make people change to D weapons in normal games, 2++ is stupid, D is just stupider. This is not balance, there is no rock/paper/sissors, there is just overwhelming stupidity in a couple of lists that get D in them, nothing else competes.

    I’m regreting spending money getting started in this hobby.

  42. C.J. Young March 5, 2014 10:58 am #

    At our club we have played several games with 2-4 of the new Knights in a single list. They have been mediocre at shooting and not that hard to kill but great in assault. In fact, in a game last night 4 imperial knights got blown away by O’Vesa-star. I think the key is that they are not hard to kill at a distance but are great in assault but at a significant points cost.

    I believe they are kind of like flyers at the start of 6th ed. 40k. Players had a hard time with them in the beginning and it took a little time with some list changes but now flyers are not such a big deal. I think the same will be true with Knights over the long run.

    I do hope they are allowed in major events because they are great models and add a new element to the meta.

  43. Brendan March 6, 2014 5:24 am #

    My real issue with these things is that in general I think they swing the game more to being a shooting game than it is now. Most Deathstars rose up as an answer to serpent spam and Tau gunline. Because they were the only way for assaulty armies (like Daemons) to deal with those armies. I’m not saying I love Deathstars, but S D close combat weapons hurt more than just Deathstars.

    To me as a Daemon player I feel they limit my book to a mono build (FMC spam) and that is only marginally effective against Knights (assuming they don’t bring counters to flyers which they shoudl and will)

    Daemons literally have no way to kill a knight at range, and they are extremely poor at doing it up close as well.

    As for people saying “Well you cannot do 6 wounds to a wraithknight as easily” Sure you can…my Balesword one shots them all the time, as to other wraithknights, or force weapons etc.

    Beyond that I would love to see the model on the table (the same as I would for other super heavies) I just wish GW gave us rules that were compatible with the rest of the game.

    I really think rules changes are in order to fix the game at this point. My suggestions would be the following.

    1.) Grimoir max 3++
    2.) Fortune = 4+ FNP
    3.) Marker Lights = -1 coversave perlight
    4.) Tau can only use one Signature system at a time
    5.)S D weapons nerfed (maybe just make them S10 AP1)
    6.) Stomp changed just to be D3 templates at S6 AP4
    7.) Formations/inquisiton take up an allied detachment
    8.) BB ICs cannot join allied units.

    Then maybe a few small tweaks elsewhere…but really to me if you let knights in you might as well allow all super heavies and lets go to crazy town.

Leave a Reply