Via Atia.

Atia wrote:
it looks like two new Knights will be part of this release.


Knight Warden:
http://www.games-workshop.com/en-us/knight-warden

Knight Crusader:
http://www.games-workshop.com/en-us/knight-crusader

Pictures:

http://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/en-us/salt

Atia's been spot-on so far with redirects, and they definitely do autocorrect and capitalize the Knight and Crusader/Warden bits when entered.

Oh goodie, here's hoping they'll also be included in HH 5 Tempest then, I want more Kniggits for my Questoris.

So what am I looking at?

How the heck do people find these things out?
Just type random things on GWs site and hope something sticks?

 MadCowCrazy wrote:
How the heck do people find these things out?
Just type random things on GWs site and hope something sticks?

GW love a good leak, keeps the purse strings open.

 MadCowCrazy wrote:
How the heck do people find these things out?
Just type random things on GWs site and hope something sticks?

I'm not sure how Atia does it, but you could make a program that just tries certain combinations keywords and see what returns a redirect. And of course, you could make intelligent guesses based on rumours about what's coming.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SJM wrote:
So what am I looking at?

http://natfka.blogspot.nl/2015/04/redirects-everything-you-need-to-know.html

Knight Crusader! Break out those Quake Cannons...

Err, are we looking at a new dual kit or two upgrade sprues? GW hasn't done the latter in ages.

I wonder how they´ll do a dual kit, seeing as the older models look nothing alike.

I don't think that's a big issue. It's mostly the front/top of the torso that would need to be interchangeable.

Oh bugger off GW; I finally caved and ordered a FW Knight, Now they're hitting me when the flood gates have finally opened.

I call foul!

Should have just done the Knight codex right first time

Meh, even with these supposed additions it still would be a far cry from the Questoris Knight list.

Who knows, maybe GW can learn from FW or maybe that Questoris Household list is based loosely off of something GW was working on... I know wishful thinking.

 BrookM wrote:
I wonder how they´ll do a dual kit, seeing as the older models look nothing alike.

There were 3 different wardens that all looked nothing like a Crusader. The likely answer is that GW redesigned one or both to look more like the other. The Warden could just as easily be nothing like its original concept and simply a Warden in name only.

I'm hoping the Warden-Crusader combo ends up with a weapons orientation kinda like this warden, since I think the old crusader/castellan looked really off balanced


Epic Crusader Knight:


Pimping my own conversion:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Atia's been spot-on so far with redirects, and they definitely do autocorrect and capitalize the Knight and Crusader/Warden bits when entered.

Exactly this.

 aka_mythos wrote:

I'm hoping the Warden-Crusader combo ends up with a weapons orientation kinda like this warden, since I think the old crusader/castellan looked really off balanced

Donald Duck, the Hunch Back of Magic Kingdom.

But look at his sweet little T-Rex gun arms. Ahhh, so cute.

Like a walking battleship.

kronk wrote:


Donald Duck, the Hunch Back of Magic Kingdom.

I think it the weapon orientation thats more important that those ha-ha-aesthetic choices.

I do think that form lends itself better to the new aesthetic.

Did any of these actually pan out for the Eldar release though? Certainly not all of them.

Nvs wrote:
Did any of these actually pan out for the Eldar release though? Certainly not all of them.

The only one that hasn't is the Avatar, but its easy to imagine GW giving that one a separate week than the rest. The rest were spot on.

 aka_mythos wrote:

Nvs wrote:
Did any of these actually pan out for the Eldar release though? Certainly not all of them.

The only one that hasn't is the Avatar, but its easy to imagine GW giving that one a separate week than the rest. The rest were spot on.

I thought the Eldar one was thought to be the fW model.

Im hoping for the design of the lord in house hawkwood to appear - the old warden design on the top left seems to break physics a bit much for my liking and im not a fan of torso's on tracks eigther.



i hope eldar get horse-knights so at least i can laugh hyserically at it while it removes my models from the board.

 pretre wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:

Nvs wrote:
Did any of these actually pan out for the Eldar release though? Certainly not all of them.

The only one that hasn't is the Avatar, but its easy to imagine GW giving that one a separate week than the rest. The rest were spot on.

I thought the Eldar one was thought to be the fW model.

I think he's talking about the links and GW site re-directs.

 aka_mythos wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:

Nvs wrote:
Did any of these actually pan out for the Eldar release though? Certainly not all of them.

The only one that hasn't is the Avatar, but its easy to imagine GW giving that one a separate week than the rest. The rest were spot on.

I thought the Eldar one was thought to be the fW model.

I think he's talking about the links and GW site re-directs.

Yep, that's what I'm talking about as well.

Atia pointed out that several links they (she gets help from forum users) found are Forgeworld items like the Eldar Phantom Titan arms and other products currently sold on the FW webshop. She informed about that in time (at least a week before the WD leaks) including a warning the Avatar could be amongst those and actually not a new plastic kit. Unfortunately the plastic Avatar 'rumor train' was on full choochoo already so this was not making all blogs in time. These FW item links they found COULD be a hint both webshops will be merged sometimes in the future. They found lots of other FW products

Regarding more plastic Knights from GW - yes, please. The old shapes from 1st Edition will probably not be used although there are some fantastic designs amongst them. The Knight artwork in Codex Titanicus was great - the minis not so much

I doubt it will look much like the old models. Given GW's frugal nature these days in designing models, I expect it to use as much of the current plastic Knight as possible.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
I doubt it will look much like the old models. Given GW's frugal nature these days in designing models, I expect it to use as much of the current plastic Knight as possible.

I doubt it will be all that much the same. I don't think it'd just be the old knight plus a new option sprue. Even if it is heavily based on the first knight, they'd cut whole new sprues and would likely do some manipulation to the original components. For example, even if the legs are the same, it'd be as much effort to reuse the identical legs as it would to repose the legs and give us an alternative stance. Its like the IG tanks, after they redid them, the sprues have a lot redundancy but there are actually a number of minor variations on those redundant parts.

I do hope for a completely new kit with a different pose. As much as I love the Paladin / Errant kit, the fixed pose of the legs is a sad thing.

If there's a new Knights codex as has been rumored, I'm going to be fairly upset, it wasn't too long ago that the last one came out...

Requizen wrote:
If there's a new Knights codex as has been rumored, I'm going to be fairly upset, it wasn't too long ago that the last one came out...

Yea, I was thinking this, surely they wont do a redo.

BrookM wrote:I do hope for a completely new kit with a different pose. As much as I love the Paladin / Errant kit, the fixed pose of the legs is a sad thing.

Its kinda unfortunate that GW missed that opportunity to have poseable legs with that kit. There would be a tinge of irony if this new kit, for a slow and steady moving gun platform had more dynamic poseability over the other kit. The mechanicus dragoons show how even with a static pose GW manage to pull two different poses out of that kits legs.

For some time now, GW has been trying to do as much as they can with as few sprues as they can. Hence the extremely limited options for the Knight and lack of poseability for the model. All the dual kits being released, the one piece legs on the Skitarii striders, etc. And GW has a horrible track record when it comes to properly engineering their vehicle models, anyway. They care more about making it look cool, rather than making it functional on the tabletop.

I would expect to see the exact same kit, plus a sprue that adds big guns in place of the arms/shoulders of the knight, looking more like the Crusaders shown previously in the thread.

You can hope for something better from GW, but I don't expect it.

 notprop wrote:
Oh bugger off GW; I finally caved and ordered a FW Knight, Now they're hitting me when the flood gates have finally opened.

I call foul!

Agreed. Though for me it is a Warlord titan just as FFG announced Armada Wave 2, X-Wing Wave 7, and GW comes out with the Assassins board game and now Admech Wave 2.

I'm actually not a fan of the IK model at all -- though I guess I'm in the minority. I hope this one is more to my liking.

 Talys wrote:
I'm actually not a fan of the IK model at all -- though I guess I'm in the minority. I hope this one is more to my liking.

Seems probable, as the Knight was elected the most popular model in 2014.
Which might have been motivation for GW to release another one, instead of completely outsourcing the additional knights to FW.

since the link for the avatar was probably the fw avatar, I think it's more probable that this will also be a fw kit than a new plastic kit

Good point. GW is also starting to close these loopholes in their system. Links like one of the future AdMech kits was not found anymore. Maybe already the end of datamining future releases

 SirDonlad wrote:
Im hoping for the design of the lord in house hawkwood to appear - the old warden design on the top left seems to break physics a bit much for my liking and im not a fan of torso's on tracks eigther.



i hope eldar get horse-knights so at least i can laugh hyserically at it while it removes my models from the board.

It's...it's the jazz hand that gets me with that.

EYYYYYYYY.

Nothing says "there is only WAR!" like jazz hands. FACT.

 kronk wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:

I'm hoping the Warden-Crusader combo ends up with a weapons orientation kinda like this warden, since I think the old crusader/castellan looked really off balanced

Donald Duck, the Hunch Back of Magic Kingdom.

keep in mind that the final product even is based on that could come out looking pretty cool, the general body shape could with minimal effort become something awesome.

Just for an example of something from another game...



now if the warden turned into something not too unlike the Uziel? I'd be happy

 SJM wrote:

Requizen wrote:
If there's a new Knights codex as has been rumored, I'm going to be fairly upset, it wasn't too long ago that the last one came out...

Yea, I was thinking this, surely they wont do a redo.

I'd be surprised if either the existing or new Knights made it as actual entries in any of the Mechanicus codexes. I'd not be surprised with them launching a new codex for Knights so soon, the current codex always felt rushed and has to have impacted the ongoing sales of the Knight kit.

I've avoided adding any more Knights to my Household as I knew more kits would be coming at some point. FW have the Chaos versions to do, and I would presume GW will be doing Chaos versions at some point as well so hopefully that will all be tied together.

Nice conversion mythos. That looks great.


I will say that House Mortimer's symbol is suspicious. I suspect xenos influence!

I hope there is a model with rules like the FW Castigator

The aesthetic of the Knights was never really my thing. It's one of the very few major GW releases for Imperium that I never bought, and have had no desire to purchase (even though the rules are great). However, I do love the look of many FW titans, so, there is hope yet.

 SJM wrote:

Requizen wrote:
If there's a new Knights codex as has been rumored, I'm going to be fairly upset, it wasn't too long ago that the last one came out...

Yea, I was thinking this, surely they wont do a redo.

Since the old one had 7 pages of rules, a 50% increase in size would bring it to a whole 10 pages! 11, if you round up.

This was the single silliest "Codex" that GW ever printed. The only reason I ever bought one is that all of my friends wanted to photocopy like... 3 pages from it >.<

 Talys wrote:
.....This was the single silliest "Codex" that GW ever printed. The only reason I ever bought one is that all of my friends wanted to photocopy like... 3 pages from it >.<

I bought the codex and even now still do not own a Knight. I don't regret the purchase though as to be fair it is a beautifully illustrated book, the rules are almost inconsequential, almost.

 notprop wrote:

 Talys wrote:
.....This was the single silliest "Codex" that GW ever printed. The only reason I ever bought one is that all of my friends wanted to photocopy like... 3 pages from it >.<

I bought the codex and even now still do not own a Knight. I don't regret the purchase though as to be fair it is a beautifully illustrated book, the rules are almost inconsequential, almost.

it also had some fun lore to it too

Spotted this on BoLS-

New Imperial Knight Details!

Posted by Larry Vela at April 23, 2015

knight-1011

2 new Imperial Knights are headed our way. Here’s what we know:

The two new Knights are the:
Crusader
Warden

WD181-Imperial-Knights-2

Both of these product pages have been spotted on the GW site via the redirect method by Atia on B&C.

These two types of Knights from way back in the EPIC days are the opposite end of the scale from the light and nimble Knight Lancers. These are the bruisers of the Knight Family, and is shows:

Onto the rumors:

via Bird in the Trees

Both Knights are coming via a combined combo kit.
Plastic kit will be released in the short-term, but the exact week is unknown.
The Warden & Crusader will share White Dwarf only rules initially, with inclusion in a codex coming later.
The new designs do not share the “turtle shell” carapace, and have a divergent appearance.
Both models share an up-armored, brutal appearance compared to the Paladin/Errant model.
Both share three weapon hardpoints, 2 arms and a top carapace mount.
Both new Knights share a Heavy Support position in a Imperial Knights army list.
Expect an Imperial Knights “Decurion” formation to be arriving with the new kits.

Heavy.. support..? Odd that, last time I checked the Imperial Kniggit list does not have such things.

Expect more ranged D from these two. Thats my guess anyway, give Eldar ranged D LoW fallowed shortly after by the Imperium.

 BrookM wrote:
Heavy.. support..? Odd that, last time I checked the Imperial Kniggit list does not have such things.

Maybe he means like with the FW knights where you can't have more of the variants than you have other knights.

 BrookM wrote:
Heavy.. support..? Odd that, last time I checked the Imperial Kniggit list does not have such things.

I think that was more a description of battlefield role. GW doesn't care about the FOC anymore.

 Red Corsair wrote:
Expect more ranged D from these two. Thats my guess anyway, give Eldar ranged D LoW fallowed shortly after by the Imperium.

Truth!

The last seal has been broken.

 Red Corsair wrote:

 BrookM wrote:
Heavy.. support..? Odd that, last time I checked the Imperial Kniggit list does not have such things.

I think that was more a description of battlefield role. GW doesn't care about the FOC anymore.

And Vela just speculates off of previous information to make up rumors. I wouldn't put too much into it.

 pretre wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:

 BrookM wrote:
Heavy.. support..? Odd that, last time I checked the Imperial Kniggit list does not have such things.

I think that was more a description of battlefield role. GW doesn't care about the FOC anymore.

And Vela just speculates off of previous information to make up rumors. I wouldn't put too much into it.

Your absolutely right there but honestly I think it's a pretty safe to expect.

 Red Corsair wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:

 BrookM wrote:
Heavy.. support..? Odd that, last time I checked the Imperial Kniggit list does not have such things.

I think that was more a description of battlefield role. GW doesn't care about the FOC anymore.

And Vela just speculates off of previous information to make up rumors. I wouldn't put too much into it.

Your absolutely right there but honestly I think it's a pretty safe to expect.

That's his bread and butter. He's pretty decent at anticipating based on past data. Horrible at rumors, but good at anticipation.

We're beginning to see so many D weapons that I suspect they'll soon be seen as underpowered and not special enough

I expect a new more powerful Super-Destroyer weapon to appear soon

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
We're beginning to see so many D weapons that I suspect they'll soon be seen as underpowered and not special enough

I expect a new more powerful Super-Destroyer weapon to appear soon

Indeed. Forcing in general use of Str D weapons just show the limits of the underlying game system. Though, have a look at the Banesword rules - that's armed with a Quake Cannon - should be able to glean rules from that

I just hope if this is the direction we're going that they expand each army to have their own assortment of them.

I don't want to have to bring in allies or weird attachments to get access to things that each army should have.

Saw this on BoLS!

via Bird in the Trees
•Both Knights are coming via a combined combo kit.
•Plastic kit will be released in the short-term, but the exact week is unknown.
•The Warden & Crusader will share White Dwarf only rules initially, with inclusion in a codex coming later.
•The new designs do not share the “turtle shell” carapace, and have a divergent appearance.
•Both models share an up-armored, brutal appearance compared to the Paladin/Errant model.
•Both share three weapon hardpoints, 2 arms and a top carapace mount.
•Both new Knights share a Heavy Support position in a Imperial Knights army list.
•Expect an Imperial Knights “Decurion” formation to be arriving with the new kits.

No turtle shell carapace and an "up-armored brutal appearance"!!! Maybe I will get some Knights at lat

I was not a fan of the turtle on spindly legs look (although, BrianDavion, you are totally right, it was the Readers' model of the year, so obviously just me )

We can only hope....



(this is the Thunderhawk-priced Mars Pattern Reaver Titan)

Hmmm. I had to hike to an official GW shop for the IK white dwarf last year since my local shop sold out....

Field trip time!

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
Hmmm. I had to hike to an official GW shop for the IK white dwarf last year since my local shop sold out....

Field trip time!

could also buy it digitally now

Little update via BoLS... well, maybe BIG update...

Quake Cannon or Volcano Cannon, anti-air, and built in Void Shield Generator on both.

LOL. Wraith... what?

http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2015/04/new-imperial-knight-rules.html

That's weird that it'd have a Volcano Cannon on it as that's normally on the Baneblade Chassis. Maybe they meant something else?

Hang on a second... I thought Crusader and Warden were Clan factions in Battletech?

 Breotan wrote:
Hang on a second... I thought Crusader and Warden were Clan factions in Battletech?

they are but it's not really related.

 Talys wrote:
Little update via BoLS... well, maybe BIG update...

Quake Cannon or Volcano Cannon, anti-air, and built in Void Shield Generator on both.

LOL. Wraith... what?

http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2015/04/new-imperial-knight-rules.html

Called it.

 Talys wrote:
Saw this on BoLS!

via Bird in the Trees
•Both Knights are coming via a combined combo kit.
•Plastic kit will be released in the short-term, but the exact week is unknown.
•The Warden & Crusader will share White Dwarf only rules initially, with inclusion in a codex coming later.
•The new designs do not share the “turtle shell” carapace, and have a divergent appearance.
•Both models share an up-armored, brutal appearance compared to the Paladin/Errant model.
•Both share three weapon hardpoints, 2 arms and a top carapace mount.
•Both new Knights share a Heavy Support position in a Imperial Knights army list.
•Expect an Imperial Knights “Decurion” formation to be arriving with the new kits.

No turtle shell carapace and an "up-armored brutal appearance"!!! Maybe I will get some Knights at lat

I was not a fan of the turtle on spindly legs look (although, BrianDavion, you are totally right, it was the Readers' model of the year, so obviously just me )

We can only hope....



(this is the Thunderhawk-priced Mars Pattern Reaver Titan)

The Thunderhawk is loads cheaper than the Reaver $700 for the Thawk $900 + for the Reaver

 Looky Likey wrote:

 SJM wrote:

Requizen wrote:
If there's a new Knights codex as has been rumored, I'm going to be fairly upset, it wasn't too long ago that the last one came out...

Yea, I was thinking this, surely they wont do a redo.

I'd be surprised if either the existing or new Knights made it as actual entries in any of the Mechanicus codexes. I'd not be surprised with them launching a new codex for Knights so soon, the current codex always felt rushed and has to have impacted the ongoing sales of the Knight kit.

This assumes that GW can make connections between dropping sales and a specific release (but no market research). In fact, it would mean they would have to accept that their game actually does impact sales rather than just everyone buying The World's Finest Miniatures.

 sonofruss wrote:

The Thunderhawk is loads cheaper than the Reaver $700 for the Thawk $900 + for the Reaver

It's the weapons that kill you on the Reaves, but when you get to $700 for a model, who's counting?

It's really no different than price between a Chimera and a Taurox.

Naftka wrote:
The news continues on an Imperial Knight release that includes two new units, an Imperial Knight Warden, and Crusader. These guys look large and powerful, with 8 hull points, heavy armor and a single energy field. Check out the latest.


Please remember that these are rumors. There were some earlier rumors as well on just what this release would be.. you can find that article here.
http://natfka.blogspot.com/2015/04/imperial-knight-new-model-releases.html

via Bird in the Trees on Bols
Crusader is armed with: Quake Cannon, TL Las-cannons
Warden is armed with: Volcano Cannon, Multi-barreled Autocannon
Both models have an optional top carapace missile launcher weapon mount, with multishot S8, AP3 anti-flyer capability
Both models are protected by a single energy field based heavily on the rules for the Stronghold Assault book’s Void Shield Generator.
Armor Values: Front:14 Side:13 Rear:13
Hull Points: 8
Both models clock in well above the cost of the Knight Paladin/Errant

It will be nice to get some decent flyer defense in the form of a Knight, even more so than getting extra big guns.

could someone please post the stats for the quake cannon and volcano cannon or show me where to find them. Thanks!

Quake is S9 A3 Apoc
Volcano is SD A2 Large

Reposting this from another thread:



Knights out sooner than we think?

 zedmeister wrote:
Reposting this from another thread:



Knights out sooner than we think?

Nah. That will be the new forgeworld release for sure.

have they ever released something FW through WD like that? like on the cover?

 Dramagod2 wrote:
have they ever released something FW through WD like that? like on the cover?

I thought the rumor was that these were going to be plastic kits...

Just curious: how do we know its Imperial knights?
Or even 40k?
Imperial knights are kalled Imperial-Knight, these are called Knight-Warden etc.

Perhaps I dont get these redirects, but to me it sounds like it could as well be a new fantasy dual kit, you know, the new heavily armoured holy knights the rumors keep bringing up.
"Knight warden of sigmar!"
"Holy knight crusader of sigmar!"
Stuff like that...

 agnosto wrote:

 Dramagod2 wrote:
have they ever released something FW through WD like that? like on the cover?

I thought the rumor was that these were going to be plastic kits...

One of the theories is that the teaser is for the new FW titan.

 pretre wrote:

 agnosto wrote:

 Dramagod2 wrote:
have they ever released something FW through WD like that? like on the cover?

I thought the rumor was that these were going to be plastic kits...

One of the theories is that the teaser is for the new FW titan.

Ahh. I see. I'm a sucker for big, stompy robots so if the Warden/Crusader thing is true, they get my money...again.

well another possibility has also just been floated

via an anonymous source on Faeit 212
I was just told that there is a new Giant Robot for Cult Mechanicus in the Heavy Support slot
You get 2 giant robots and one Datasmith as a squad. The robots stand twice the ht of a space marine and are MCs. If I remember correctly you can add additional robots, it was 2 or 3. The Datasmith is a character that controls them.

Twice the height of a space marine isn't much of a giant robot...

 Gitsplitta wrote:
Twice the height of a space marine isn't much of a giant robot...

Yeah, not going to call that "giant" more like a centurion....

That would be very disappointing, really big would be the Warlord, big just about applied to the Knights as so many other kits have come out at that size.

 Fayric wrote:
Just curious: how do we know its Imperial knights?
Or even 40k?
Imperial knights are kalled Imperial-Knight, these are called Knight-Warden etc.

Perhaps I dont get these redirects, but to me it sounds like it could as well be a new fantasy dual kit, you know, the new heavily armoured holy knights the rumors keep bringing up.
"Knight warden of sigmar!"
"Holy knight crusader of sigmar!"
Stuff like that...

Redirects: The redirects work on the capitalization/autocorrect of products that have been entered into the system but disabled until GW's ready to release them. If the URL contains a real product, but miscapitalized, an HTTP GET request returns a different code that says it's moved than if you send it with the correct capitalization.

It's not going to be a fantasy kit for a couple of reasons:

1. The WD teaser (it would have to be a ginormous knight of sigmar)
2. There are 4 redirects:

- Codex Imperial Knights
- Datacards Imperial Knights
- Knight Warden
- Knight Crusader

Yes, we will at last hit double digits of useful pages in Codex Imperial Knights. And we will have datacards for a faction with 2 kits/4 variants. Woohoo.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Looky Likey wrote:
That would be very disappointing, really big would be the Warlord, big just about applied to the Knights as so many other kits have come out at that size.

Warlord would be humongous... Though there is a video I saw the other day with a warlord at the end with shoulder mounted weapons (painting). Very sweet

We can't have a warlord kit for the same reason that GW won't give us a plastic Thunderhawk... they just don't want us to have nice things.

Has anyone else chimed in on this other than "Bird in the Trees"?

BloodGrin wrote:
Has anyone else chimed in on this other than "Bird in the Trees"?

Not that I've seen.

Yay more strength d for normal 40k. It's like gw has just given up.

Would be cool to see a tracked warden

 Kirasu wrote:
Yay more strength d for normal 40k. It's like gw has just given up.

Yup. I've just broken down and accepted it. I hate super-heavies and D weapons, but they're pushing them to the forefront. Now I just have to wait for my armies to get updated (good luck Orks).

 pretre wrote:

BloodGrin wrote:
Has anyone else chimed in on this other than "Bird in the Trees"?

Not that I've seen.

BoLS confirmed the redirects for the 4 products (Codex, Datacards, 2 Knights)

 Talys wrote:

 pretre wrote:

BloodGrin wrote:
Has anyone else chimed in on this other than "Bird in the Trees"?

Not that I've seen.

BoLS confirmed the redirects for the 4 products (Codex, Datacards, 2 Knights)

Please never ever use the words "BoLS confirmed" to me in a sentence with a straight face.
Please. No hate on you, please understand.
BoLS leeches off of the work of the work and information of other people, and the information of people in forums like this.
BoLS information right now is coming from their source Birds in the Trees, and again more power to them I am just wondering why Darmok, Lords of War or any of the others has not had a word on this yet.

I have confirmed webpage redirects to all 4 things.
Of course, before redirects were patched.

 BloodGrin wrote:

 Talys wrote:

 pretre wrote:

BloodGrin wrote:
Has anyone else chimed in on this other than "Bird in the Trees"?

Not that I've seen.

BoLS confirmed the redirects for the 4 products (Codex, Datacards, 2 Knights)

Please never ever use the words "BoLS confirmed" to me in a sentence with a straight face.
Please. No hate on you, please understand.
BoLS leeches off of the work of the work and information of other people, and the information of people in forums like this.
BoLS information right now is coming from their source Birds in the Trees, and again more power to them I am just wondering why Darmok, Lords of War or any of the others has not had a word on this yet.

Sure thing.. I actually made a typo (or mental fart). I actually meant B&C... Bolter & Chainsword And great on Verviedi for verifying it

The "details" rumors though, as you say, were from their source, Bird in the Trees.

B&C isn't much better or closer to the truth than anyone else. They just like to make it look like they are (despite being nearly on the third page in google search results).

Anyway. Bring on more knights, GeeDub! I wanted to build a proper star (five mechs), and with two more unique models... two questoris, two warden/crusaders and one cerastus it just might be possible.

I don't think anyone has mentioned it, but what are the "other" cards in the datacards going to be used for ?

They don't have a Psychic disipline.

Imperial Knight special orders ? Commands from the Machine God ? Datasheets ?

 adamsouza wrote:
I don't think anyone has mentioned it, but what are the "other" cards in the datacards going to be used for ?

They don't have a Psychic disipline.

Imperial Knight special orders ? Commands from the Machine God ? Datasheets ?

It's a safe bet. Skitarii didn't come with psychic powers, instead it was the doctrine cards.

Doesn't the new Eldar codex kind of make Knights obsolete now? All it really takes is a D shot even at a -1 to the D table to basically wipe one out, doesnt it?

 Kimchi Gamer wrote:
Doesn't the new Eldar codex kind of make Knights obsolete now? All it really takes is a D shot even at a -1 to the D table to basically wipe one out, doesnt it?

It'd take more than one at -1 on the table unless it's already missing some HPs since the best one shot can do is 4 HPs...but yeah, the Eldar codex has completely wrecked the game as far as anything with an armor value and S6 spam on a relatively cheap platform means MCs are gonna hurt too.

*sigh*

The arms race is back. After a series of fairly well-balanced books, we get a slightly OP Necron codex and now the Eldar abomination.

 Kimchi Gamer wrote:
Doesn't the new Eldar codex kind of make Knights obsolete now? All it really takes is a D shot even at a -1 to the D table to basically wipe one out, doesnt it?

If the rumors are true, the new Knights will have Void Shield Generator, so no, 1 hit of anything including a perfect 6 on the Destroyer table won't kill it

Of course, this is GW. When SM codex comes out, Librarians will be able to give units an invulnerable invulnerable save, that will counter things that say that models don't get an invulnerable save. And then the Tau will get a Special to bypass it.

 agnosto wrote:

 Kimchi Gamer wrote:
Doesn't the new Eldar codex kind of make Knights obsolete now? All it really takes is a D shot even at a -1 to the D table to basically wipe one out, doesnt it?

It'd take more than one at -1 on the table unless it's already missing some HPs since the best one shot can do is 4 HPs...but yeah, the Eldar codex has completely wrecked the game as far as anything with an armor value and S6 spam on a relatively cheap platform means MCs are gonna hurt too.

*sigh*

The arms race is back. After a series of fairly well-balanced books, we get a slightly OP Necron codex and now the Eldar abomination.

With the d flamer, you could roll a 3 for the hp damage, and then a destroy result for the pen, and roll another 3 on d3, resulting in 6 hull points from a single d scythe.

Isnt that only a 1.79% chance of actually occurring though?

 Shigematsu wrote:
Isnt that only a 1.79% chance of actually occurring though?

I didn't say it was likely, just responding to a guy who said that they could only do 4 hp in one shot.

 adamsouza wrote:
I don't think anyone has mentioned it, but what are the "other" cards in the datacards going to be used for ?

They don't have a Psychic disipline.

Imperial Knight special orders ? Commands from the Machine God ? Datasheets ?

They might add selectable, as well as more, Knight ranks and have them as cards.

I wonder if the void shields will replace the ion shield?

niv-mizzet wrote:

 agnosto wrote:

 Kimchi Gamer wrote:
Doesn't the new Eldar codex kind of make Knights obsolete now? All it really takes is a D shot even at a -1 to the D table to basically wipe one out, doesnt it?

It'd take more than one at -1 on the table unless it's already missing some HPs since the best one shot can do is 4 HPs...but yeah, the Eldar codex has completely wrecked the game as far as anything with an armor value and S6 spam on a relatively cheap platform means MCs are gonna hurt too.

*sigh*

The arms race is back. After a series of fairly well-balanced books, we get a slightly OP Necron codex and now the Eldar abomination.

With the d flamer, you could roll a 3 for the hp damage, and then a destroy result for the pen, and roll another 3 on d3, resulting in 6 hull points from a single d scythe.

D weapons don't work that way. You roll on the chart and that's all you get. A maximum of d3 HP are lost instead of 1 so I was wrong about max 4. It's in the BRB. D weapons aren't nearly as strong as they used to be.

But SHs do. If the penetrating hit from the D weapon (or any weapon in general) causes an Explodes! result, D3 additional hullpoints are lost instead of it instantly exploding.

 Talys wrote:

 Kimchi Gamer wrote:
Doesn't the new Eldar codex kind of make Knights obsolete now? All it really takes is a D shot even at a -1 to the D table to basically wipe one out, doesnt it?

If the rumors are true, the new Knights will have Void Shield Generator, so no, 1 hit of anything including a perfect 6 on the Destroyer table won't kill it

Of course, this is GW. When SM codex comes out, Librarians will be able to give units an invulnerable invulnerable save, that will counter things that say that models don't get an invulnerable save. And then the Tau will get a Special to bypass it.

This...I am completely terrified of the Space Marine Codex.
Grav guns and pistols everywhere, re-rolls on everything, chapter tactics here there and everywhere.
Here an invul, there an invul...
Special Marines will live up to it.
This that we have received with Necrons and Eldar...these are the candy and flowers, the soft whispers and sweet nothings before we get completely wrecked when Games Workshop shows you who their real favorite is.

And then you have Chaos Space Marines..... LOL!

No literally.... lol... they're awful

Shouldn't have strayed from the Emperor's light.

It's okay, just wait for CODEX: CHAOS KNIGHTS !!

Then Chaos will have Imperial Knights with Daemonic Blessings.

Ion Shield ? I get a 5++ Daemonic Save and 3+ cover save thanks to Shrouded, from my Mark of Nurgle....

 agnosto wrote:

niv-mizzet wrote:

 agnosto wrote:

 Kimchi Gamer wrote:
Doesn't the new Eldar codex kind of make Knights obsolete now? All it really takes is a D shot even at a -1 to the D table to basically wipe one out, doesnt it?

It'd take more than one at -1 on the table unless it's already missing some HPs since the best one shot can do is 4 HPs...but yeah, the Eldar codex has completely wrecked the game as far as anything with an armor value and S6 spam on a relatively cheap platform means MCs are gonna hurt too.

*sigh*

The arms race is back. After a series of fairly well-balanced books, we get a slightly OP Necron codex and now the Eldar abomination.

With the d flamer, you could roll a 3 for the hp damage, and then a destroy result for the pen, and roll another 3 on d3, resulting in 6 hull points from a single d scythe.

D weapons don't work that way. You roll on the chart and that's all you get. A maximum of d3 HP are lost instead of 1 so I was wrong about max 4. It's in the BRB. D weapons aren't nearly as strong as they used to be.

No. You get an automatic penetrating hit. The only difference on the D chart is that instead of 1 hull point for glance/penning, you get d3. Nowhere in the rules does it say to ignore the rest of the rules for a penetrating hit. IE you still roll on the vehicle damage chart to find out what the penning hit did. (And on a super heavy, the only result that matters is a destroyed result of course.)

It would be kind of strange if a str D ap1 weapon wasn't able to blow up an ork trukk, while even a heavy bolter could.

niv-mizzet wrote:

 agnosto wrote:

niv-mizzet wrote:

 agnosto wrote:

 Kimchi Gamer wrote:
Doesn't the new Eldar codex kind of make Knights obsolete now? All it really takes is a D shot even at a -1 to the D table to basically wipe one out, doesnt it?

It'd take more than one at -1 on the table unless it's already missing some HPs since the best one shot can do is 4 HPs...but yeah, the Eldar codex has completely wrecked the game as far as anything with an armor value and S6 spam on a relatively cheap platform means MCs are gonna hurt too.

*sigh*

The arms race is back. After a series of fairly well-balanced books, we get a slightly OP Necron codex and now the Eldar abomination.

With the d flamer, you could roll a 3 for the hp damage, and then a destroy result for the pen, and roll another 3 on d3, resulting in 6 hull points from a single d scythe.

D weapons don't work that way. You roll on the chart and that's all you get. A maximum of d3 HP are lost instead of 1 so I was wrong about max 4. It's in the BRB. D weapons aren't nearly as strong as they used to be.

No. You get an automatic penetrating hit. The only difference on the D chart is that instead of 1 hull point for glance/penning, you get d3. Nowhere in the rules does it say to ignore the rest of the rules for a penetrating hit. IE you still roll on the vehicle damage chart to find out what the penning hit did. (And on a super heavy, the only result that matters is a destroyed result of course.)

It would be kind of strange if a str D ap1 weapon wasn't able to blow up an ork trukk, while even a heavy bolter could.

Correct, it says very clearly " The model suffers a penetrating hit that blah blah blah"

niv-mizzet wrote:

No. You get an automatic penetrating hit. The only difference on the D chart is that instead of 1 hull point for glance/penning, you get d3. Nowhere in the rules does it say to ignore the rest of the rules for a penetrating hit. IE you still roll on the vehicle damage chart to find out what the penning hit did. (And on a super heavy, the only result that matters is a destroyed result of course.)

It would be kind of strange if a str D ap1 weapon wasn't able to blow up an ork trukk, while even a heavy bolter could.

Is there something missing from the rulebook then? All my rulebook says is:

If a weapon has a D instead of a Stength value in its profile, it is a Destroyer weapon. To resolve a Destroyer weapon's attack, roll To Hit as you would for a standard attack. If the attack hits, roll on the table above instead of rolling To Wound or for armour penetration. Most Destroyer Weapons have AP1 or AP2, so armour saves are not typically allowed. Cover saves and invulnerable saves can be taken against hits from a Destroyer weapon as normal, unless a Devastating Hit or Deathblow result is rolled. For the purposes of determining if a Destroyer hit has the Instant Death special rule, assume it has Strength 10. Multiple Wounds/Hull Points inflicted by a Destroyer hit do not carry over to other models in the unit (any excess are lost).

That's it. I don't see permission to roll on the vehicle damage chart in addition to the D chart or even that it counts as a penetrating hit. That's the reason why a 1 on the D chart is a no harm result, it doesn't make much sense to have 2 results from the same attack.

A bit off topic but it would help to know if I and my group have been playing it wrong because the rules are, oddly enough, pretty clear to me anyway.


Edit:

I see, it's in the results themselves. "The model suffers a penetrating hit"; I just assumed that was the total result not permission to roll on yet another chart.

I do only play this game once every 3-4 months so, be gentle here.

Edit 2:

Now I'm really confused. The wording is the penetrating hit causes d3 instead of 1 HP. So if you roll 1 one on the pen chart, does that mean you don't get the d3?


Sorry, this is way off-topic.

 agnosto wrote:


Now I'm really confused. The wording is the penetrating hit causes d3 instead of 1 HP. So if you roll 1 one on the pen chart, does that mean you don't get the d3?


Sorry, this is way off-topic.

Normal weapon- glancing hit does 1 hp. penetrating hit does 1 hp plus a roll on the damage chart.;
Destroyer- 1 does nothing. 2-5 does d3 hp plus a roll on the damage chart. 6 does 6+d6 hp and a roll on the damage chart

 agnosto wrote:

niv-mizzet wrote:

No. You get an automatic penetrating hit. The only difference on the D chart is that instead of 1 hull point for glance/penning, you get d3. Nowhere in the rules does it say to ignore the rest of the rules for a penetrating hit. IE you still roll on the vehicle damage chart to find out what the penning hit did. (And on a super heavy, the only result that matters is a destroyed result of course.)

It would be kind of strange if a str D ap1 weapon wasn't able to blow up an ork trukk, while even a heavy bolter could.

Is there something missing from the rulebook then? All my rulebook says is:

If a weapon has a D instead of a Stength value in its profile, it is a Destroyer weapon. To resolve a Destroyer weapon's attack, roll To Hit as you would for a standard attack. If the attack hits, roll on the table above instead of rolling To Wound or for armour penetration. Most Destroyer Weapons have AP1 or AP2, so armour saves are not typically allowed. Cover saves and invulnerable saves can be taken against hits from a Destroyer weapon as normal, unless a Devastating Hit or Deathblow result is rolled. For the purposes of determining if a Destroyer hit has the Instant Death special rule, assume it has Strength 10. Multiple Wounds/Hull Points inflicted by a Destroyer hit do not carry over to other models in the unit (any excess are lost).

That's it. I don't see permission to roll on the vehicle damage chart in addition to the D chart or even that it counts as a penetrating hit. That's the reason why a 1 on the D chart is a no harm result, it doesn't make much sense to have 2 results from the same attack.

A bit off topic but it would help to know if I and my group have been playing it wrong because the rules are, oddly enough, pretty clear to me anyway.


Edit:

I see, it's in the results themselves. "The model suffers a penetrating hit"; I just assumed that was the total result not permission to roll on yet another chart.

I do only play this game once every 3-4 months so, be gentle here.

Edit 2:

Now I'm really confused. The wording is the penetrating hit causes d3 instead of 1 HP. So if you roll 1 one on the pen chart, does that mean you don't get the d3?


Sorry, this is way off-topic.

A penetrating hit always does 1 hull point plus the result of the damage roll (crew shaken, weapon destroyed, whatever)....In the case of a D weapon you resove the pentrating hit, and also lose the D3 hull points, maybe just 1, maybe 3.
The hull points have nothing to do with the penetrating hit.
Edit: or as explained above.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
Normal weapon- glancing hit does 1 hp. penetrating hit does 1 hp plus a roll on the damage chart.;
Destroyer- 1 does nothing. 2-5 does d3 hp plus a roll on the damage chart. 6 does 6+d6 hp and a roll on the damage chart

I think I'm going to have this tattooed on my forearm... or forehead... maybe both.

Some odd rumours out there on BoLS, etc.. . I think it is only an upgrade sprue with a few new weapons (including a big powerfist) for the same old Knight, I am afraid. The Razorback to last years Rhino, if you like.

On the upside, I believe it'll build three new Knight variants, not two, as well as new options for the Paladin and Errant.

Any thoughts on if it comes as simply the sprue, somewhat counter to recent years, or it'll be a different box with the sprue added into the existing kit?

Have to say I noticed as soon as the knight kit came out that there is some kind of socket/pivot/mounting point on the top of the main hull, so it wouldn't surprise me if it was just an add-on to the existing kit.

Sad Panda wrote:
Some odd rumours out there on BoLS, etc.. . I think it is only an upgrade sprue with a few new weapons (including a big powerfist) for the same old Knight, I am afraid. The Razorback to last years Rhino, if you like.

On the upside, I believe it'll build three new Knight variants, not two, as well as new options for the Paladin and Errant.

Well, it'd be 4 variants. But I don't think it will be the same chassis, if the rumors are correct -- it's not supposed to have the turtle shell look.

Posting this here from the Execution Force thread- Discuss away!

 angelofvengeance wrote:
The Paint Splatter hint for next week is "Large armour plates"

 Jadenim wrote:
Have to say I noticed as soon as the knight kit came out that there is some kind of socket/pivot/mounting point on the top of the main hull, so it wouldn't surprise me if it was just an add-on to the existing kit.

Perhaps you are right, but Natfka's source Atia said it's gonna be a new profile without a dome-shaped carapace. Would be neat to see some variation other than weapon arms I think.

 Hive City Dweller wrote:

 Jadenim wrote:
Have to say I noticed as soon as the knight kit came out that there is some kind of socket/pivot/mounting point on the top of the main hull, so it wouldn't surprise me if it was just an add-on to the existing kit.

Perhaps you are right, but Natfka's source Atia said it's gonna be a new profile without a dome-shaped carapace. Would be neat to see some variation other than weapon arms I think.

Hopefully something like a blend of the Knight Paladin kit and the Destroid Monster from Robotech...

 Hive City Dweller wrote:

 Jadenim wrote:
Have to say I noticed as soon as the knight kit came out that there is some kind of socket/pivot/mounting point on the top of the main hull, so it wouldn't surprise me if it was just an add-on to the existing kit.

Perhaps you are right, but Natfka's source Atia said it's gonna be a new profile without a dome-shaped carapace. Would be neat to see some variation other than weapon arms I think.

Atia isn't a Natfka source.

He(or she--not sure) is a poster on Bolter and Chainsword. The individual has found a lot of the datamining stuff and made their postings pretty public about it there.

For something like a missile launcher I figured you'd end up with a mounting like the Reaver Apocalypse launcher; I agree that a large cannon would look better being integrated into a new, larger, hull.

It'd be hilarious, and totally par the course if the "new" knight is a torso that uses the same leg set as the existing kit.

But it'd be sold as an upgrade set, so you'd have to buy the old and new knight kits to make one.

I dunno if I like the thought of Warden/Crusaders looking too different. I want a similar profile. A knight army only has 5-6 models, so you start to lose a cohesive aesthetic a lot quicker when 1 or 2 models are too different from the rest.

From the silhouettes in the new trailer, it looks like the new Knights are based on the same chassis. I'm guessing a rebox of the legs/torso with a new weapon sprue?

http://www.games-workshop.com/en-GB/blog/blog.jsp?_requestid=3851427

Yes.

YES.

YES.

Agree that it looks like a new sprue or two to give us more options for arms and a top mounted weapon. I'll probably pick up another four...

Same here and one of them will have that power fist, rules be damned!

3 new variants shown:

First has a D strength chainsaw from the prior 2 knights, but a new fist on the other arm and what appears to be a missile launcher on the top of it's chassis.

Second has the battle cannon and what appears to be a chaingun on the other arm, and what looks to be an AA gun mounted on the top of the chassis.

Third has the chaingun arm same as the second, and the new fist and chassis missile launcher from the first.

If you freeze-frame perfectly between the transition from the "old" knight to the new first variant, the new one appears taller, but GW just offset the silhouette slightly. The pauldrons, chassic and legs all appear to be identical. So yes, this is either a separate upgrade sprue or, more likely, a rebox with 1 sprue swapped out as in the current box, all of the weapons are on a single sprue.

New Knights confirmed...

Some screen grabs:

via Bird in the Trees
The new designs do not share the “turtle shell” carapace, and have a divergent appearance.

Doesn't look like this one panned out. Those silhouettes look exactly like the current "turtle shell" Knight.

Plus, the current carapace design has a nice hole up top that was just screaming for something to be mounted there.

 angelofvengeance wrote:
Some screen grabs:

Oh my.....

This makes me think I was too hasty getting a FW Castigator at Salute.

One can never have too many suits of armour.

 Breotan wrote:

via Bird in the Trees
The new designs do not share the “turtle shell” carapace, and have a divergent appearance.

Doesn't look like this one panned out. Those silhouettes look exactly like the current "turtle shell" Knight.

Yeah, sadly :(

True, but i'll need a real one for me when the Mrs finds out how much they cost!

I'm actually really disappointed in that, I hate that it's non posable anyway and now you might have even more variants in the exact same pose.

The frustrating thing is that having quit 40k (for 30k) i've found GW are still after my wallet!

3 new versions well that fills out my house then get another of the current one for the "melta" gun and 3 of the new ones that gives me the max of 6 on a force org.
But why now good thing I am getting a new job.

Finally! Looks like we can fit a giant power fist to the Errant!

These are going to be pricy

Knight plus 2 new arms plus weapons plus maybe a new head?

Looking at the weapon sprue:

The Battlecannon, Melta and chainsword are all on the same sprue. The shots of the new Knights have everything but the Melta, so either this sprue has been replaced or there is an additional sprue.

 zedmeister wrote:
Finally! Looks like we can fit a giant power fist to the Errant!

Same! I'm glad I haven't wrapped up my Errant build yet. Worse case scenario the fist will simply count as a Reaper.

Most likely an extra sprue?

I think so too, but hope not, we also need leg variants.

Naftka wrote:

There is a short list of releases this week which reveal that the Imperial Knights will get a one week update; Codex, Data Cards, and Imperial Knight Warden. Of course we can see the pricing for these as well now, so here is what we are looking at.


This is very much a reality at this point, but as such must remain a rumor until we get some official release information.

via anonymous sources on Faeit 212
This Week's Pre-Orders for Warhammer 40k
Imperial Knight Codex £ 25.00
Imperial Knight Warden £ 95.00
Datacards: Imperial Knight £ 7.50

Codex: $41.25
Warden/Crusader: $160
Datacards: $12.50

For the less squiggle-inclined.

If it's only new sprue that simply adds more options to existing IK (which I hope it's not), would it be foolish to expect GW put in another extra one, so we could upgrade our old Knights? You know, just in case the new rules make older ones obsolete.

 SirDonlad wrote:
The frustrating thing is that having quit 40k (for 30k) i've found GW are still after my wallet!

If it makes you feel any better... your money is going to the same place whether you buy 40k or 30k, so I doubt GW cares which one you buy

Ranged D incoming!

 Verviedi wrote:

Naftka wrote:

There is a short list of releases this week which reveal that the Imperial Knights will get a one week update; Codex, Data Cards, and Imperial Knight Warden. Of course we can see the pricing for these as well now, so here is what we are looking at.


This is very much a reality at this point, but as such must remain a rumor until we get some official release information.

via anonymous sources on Faeit 212
This Week's Pre-Orders for Warhammer 40k
Imperial Knight Codex £ 25.00
Imperial Knight Warden £ 95.00
Datacards: Imperial Knight £ 7.50

Codex: $38
Warden/Crusader: $140
Datacards: $11.30

For the less squiggle-inclined.

Yeah...
That list you posted is wrong. They don't do exact currency conversions but rather have price "brackets".

The Warden/Crusader is in the same bracket as the Lord of Skulls/Tesseract Vault. That would put it at $160 USD
The Codex is in the same price bracket as the Shrine of the Aquila, which would put it at $41.25.
Datacards would be $12.50(I can say that one for certain because that is how much the Skitarii cards were).

I could see the warden/crusader staying the same cost as the existing knight. Isn't that one $140?

Shame they're not going to reproduced the Knight transfer sheet :(

 Hulksmash wrote:
I could see the warden/crusader staying the same cost as the existing knight. Isn't that one $140?

It is; but depending on the way the Warden/Crusader kit is done(like if it includes the sprue for the Paladin/Errant) GW might just bump the price to $160 and call it a day.

Is anyone REALLY surprised that they re getting a new codex so soon? I mean.... 2 unit entries.....

I'm actually pretty happy about this..... except now this means facing even more super heavies/gargants.

My poor orks and csm!

Really disappointing if they keep the same legs.

I've got two unbuilt Knights, a sprue as an independent upgrade option, however unlikely, would be a massive plus for me (and a GW purchase for the first time in months.)

I'm in two minds on the Codex, while I'm an unapologetic Knight fanboy, I think the models are the best thing GW has done in ages even with the limited poseability, I'm increasingly unsure as to if I'll ever field them. If the new book is a masterwork, maybe, but if it is like the existing one where if you spring them on an unprepared opponent then it'll normally be a rofl stomp and if you announce in advance then you'll encounter masses of anti tank and haywire, they're tough to get a fair and competitive game with.

 Verviedi wrote:

Naftka wrote:

There is a short list of releases this week which reveal that the Imperial Knights will get a one week update; Codex, Data Cards, and Imperial Knight Warden. Of course we can see the pricing for these as well now, so here is what we are looking at.


This is very much a reality at this point, but as such must remain a rumor until we get some official release information.

via anonymous sources on Faeit 212
This Week's Pre-Orders for Warhammer 40k
Imperial Knight Codex £ 25.00
Imperial Knight Warden £ 95.00
Datacards: Imperial Knight £ 7.50

Codex: $41.25
Warden/Crusader: $160
Datacards: $12.50

For the less squiggle-inclined.

Seeing as how the regular Knight is already 170CAD, I dread to see how much these will cost... My bet is 200$+. I'm somewhat tempted to get one of these kits, but for not all that much more, I could get a FW Knight. This might push me to go that route earlier than I expected after all!

I doubt it will happen, but I really hope they will include the existing Forge World Imperial Knights in the codex. It would be great to have them all in one book, as well as add some additional content to the codex.

 Azreal13 wrote:
I've got two unbuilt Knights, a sprue as an independent upgrade option, however unlikely, would be a massive plus for me (and a GW purchase for the first time in months.)

I'm in two minds on the Codex, while I'm an unapologetic Knight fanboy, I think the models are the best thing GW has done in ages even with the limited poseability, I'm increasingly unsure as to if I'll ever field them. If the new book is a masterwork, maybe, but if it is like the existing one where if you spring them on an unprepared opponent then it'll normally be a rofl stomp and if you announce in advance then you'll encounter masses of anti tank and haywire, they're tough to get a fair and competitive game with.

I hope there's a possibility of upgrading my current unbuilt Knight otherwise the £95 price tag will probably put me in the unlikely to buy category.

Extra funds are being siphoned off the slush fund just in case though.

Timing couldn't be better for me. Recently decided to take the plunge into an IK army and have a castigator and an acheron on the way. I started shoving money away as soon as the rumors on these first hit so I figure a couple of these new kits, a couple of the old kits and some magnets and i'll be sitting pretty...although it'll probably take me to next year before I get them all assembled and painted.

I like the idea of a Knight House, but as has already been stated it's always hard to find a good match for them that isn't one extreme or the other!

... I know the design is different, and you may like it or not, but there is the option of using the Dreamforge Crusader or Mortis. With the E-Z-Swap arms, you don't need to commit to a bunch in order to cover all your needs too.

 Mathieu Raymond wrote:
... I know the design is different, and you may like it or not, but there is the option of using the Dreamforge Crusader or Mortis. With the E-Z-Swap arms, you don't need to commit to a bunch in order to cover all your needs too.

Problem with Dreamforge is that their either to small by a large margin (the mini's) or to large by a significant margin (standard leviathan and mortis). To have the same approximate height you're talking about dropping the leviathan/mortis to one knee as I've seen done. The large ones are more in line with a Warhound in size, not a knight.

That said they are cool models. Not a huge fan of the individual weapon cost and building them takes forever but they are amazing kits.

 Venerate1 wrote:
I like the idea of a Knight House, but as has already been stated it's always hard to find a good match for them that isn't one extreme or the other!

Right, knights are just at a scale that really goes better with Apocalypse, and that's not something a lot of players want to play. Seeing these great new knight kits just makes me wish Epic were still around...

 Mathieu Raymond wrote:
... I know the design is different, and you may like it or not, but there is the option of using the Dreamforge Crusader or Mortis. With the E-Z-Swap arms, you don't need to commit to a bunch in order to cover all your needs too.

I have one, makes for a good Cerastus, my problem with it however is that the weapons are horrendously oversized and when put alongside the other Knights, it tends to stick out an awful lot.

Also, the extra arm kits are quite expensive around here, making the Dreamforge Crusader not a cheaper alternative either.

How tall is a knight again? A full-sized leviathan is about 8 inches. And for what it's worth, do a few inches matter that much? Genuine question, not an attack.

My warhound titan is almost 12 inches tall.

I'm excited about these, but damn... I just bought a bunch of Skitarii. This rolling thunder release schedule needs to stop.

 Mathieu Raymond wrote:
How tall is a knight again? A full-sized leviathan is about 8 inches. And for what it's worth, do a few inches matter that much? Genuine question, not an attack.

My warhound titan is almost 12 inches tall.

Here ya go:

For a limited time they had a resin version that was only 3/4" shorter and that's the closest to the same size.


I know it's wishful thinking but the teaser video... It's art of the original Knights cutting to the silhouettes of the new Knights. From that there is no way of know if they recut the legs or not... There is no way of knowing if the simply reuses the old sprue or is just a reuse of reposed digital assets.

The Dreamforge Leviathan is on par with the Cerastus Knights, though. Found this pic through Google.


Also, if one really wants a good Knight army list, there's always HH4 from Forgeworld. I'm sure Forgeworld will do a FAQ to include the new Knights into that list. It's possible that the new IK codex may adopt the rules for different roles that are present in the HH4 IK list, but I don't expect it.

Hopefully they will update the Questoris list soon then, especially if the 40k Knights are getting a revamp with regards to their Ion Shield.

 notprop wrote:

This makes me think I was too hasty getting a FW Castigator at Salute.

Not at all - I picked one up and tried it on the battlefield the other day - you won't regret that purchase

 aka_mythos wrote:
From that there is no way of know if they recut the legs or not... There is no way of knowing if the simply reuses the old sprue or is just a reuse of reposed digital assets.

The sprue is re-used - the new Knights sets are the same as the old ones (you can build the old ones from a new set, not that you would want to), with an extra sprue or two. Source: GW trade email to local store.

I thought that it might be a Skyray situation.

One assumes the existing knight box will also still be available?

Eh well this is depressing.

I hardly got to use my old codex imperial knight..

Welp WD:C:IK here i come!

Hm. I wonder if when I buy my knight if I could cut the legs and add hidden joints for better posing and then cast up a prettier version in resin. Going for a charging shoulderbash pose Which is hard with the plastic knights.

Also, on topic. Looking forward to a Warden Knight.

 notprop wrote:
One assumes the existing knight box will also still be available?

Hard to say, as it seems to be pretty much the same kit with an extra sprue. Considering they combined Baneblade / Shadowsword into one box, my guess would be that there's going to be only one Knight box as well - probably with a price increase, as GW isn't shy to ask more cash for 'extra content'.

I hope we get a new head or two as well, I like the three current options but the more variety the better.

 Hulksmash wrote:

 Mathieu Raymond wrote:
... I know the design is different, and you may like it or not, but there is the option of using the Dreamforge Crusader or Mortis. With the E-Z-Swap arms, you don't need to commit to a bunch in order to cover all your needs too.

Problem with Dreamforge is that their either to small by a large margin (the mini's) or to large by a significant margin (standard leviathan and mortis). To have the same approximate height you're talking about dropping the leviathan/mortis to one knee as I've seen done. The large ones are more in line with a Warhound in size, not a knight.

That said they are cool models. Not a huge fan of the individual weapon cost and building them takes forever but they are amazing kits.

well the new knights do have that carapace mount which will raise their height 2-3 inches from the look of it, so they'll be a better match for the standard Dreamforge Leviathans

I'm just gung ho on the rotary cannon....god I love gattling guns lol and on a huge walker? to go along with my skitarii? or my space wolves? sigh...take my money

 zedmeister wrote:
Shame they're not going to reproduced the Knight transfer sheet :(

Yeah, I could use another couple of those.

For all we know, it's packaged in this new box.

I suppose we should be grateful to the eldar players for taking the flak of introducing the whole 'ranged d' nonsense.

Can you imagine the hate towards knight lists if these had hit before the eldar 'dex?

Pics are floating around on tg

 Wilson wrote:
Pics are floating around on tg

Then post them?

Don't just say they're there.

5 Knights in 1 box? craziness

 BrookM wrote:

 Mathieu Raymond wrote:
How tall is a knight again? A full-sized leviathan is about 8 inches. And for what it's worth, do a few inches matter that much? Genuine question, not an attack.

My warhound titan is almost 12 inches tall.

Here ya go:

Just as an aside if you model the leviathan kneeling he's the same size as an IKnight.

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
Is anyone REALLY surprised that they re getting a new codex so soon? I mean.... 2 unit entries.....

I'm actually pretty happy about this..... except now this means facing even more super heavies/gargants.

My poor orks and csm!

Orks and CSM both have access to their own super heavy in plastic (they, along with IG, started this trend ). The stompa is pretty good, but the Lord of Skulls is rather overpriced, especially when you consider the cost of the upgraded weapons.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Wilson wrote:
Pics are floating around on tg

Then post them?

Don't just say they're there.

Same, how the feth do you browse that place anyway?

The pics on TG aren't anything new, unless he's talking another thread.

 pretre wrote:
The pics on TG aren't anything new, unless he's talking another thread.

I braved the toxic waters of 4chan and didn't find anything. A link would be great if there are actually new pics somewhere.

Edit: NVM, realized I am late to the party on the silhouettes.

Anyway, regarding an above comment, at least you can pose the Dreamforge model in a kneeling position (or running, or walking, or even dropkicking), unlock the IK model that just...stands there.

those are just screen caps of the GW teaser.....and please don't mention BoLS

Just saw that trailer!

YES! (I think it is a good time to buy my first knight titan, don't you?)

 adamsouza wrote:
I doubt it will happen, but I really hope they will include the existing Forge World Imperial Knights in the codex. It would be great to have them all in one book, as well as add some additional content to the codex.

Yea they won't put rules for FW models in a standard codex an apoc supplement yes but FW will stay in FW books.

With FW products moving to the main GW site you never know...

Any word on the contents of the codex? Will it contain all 8 knight varriants (5 GW and 3 FW ones) Formations (Adlance) and special characters?

Techically the FW ones are 40k approved and are choices for 40k armies

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Any word on the contents of the codex? Will it contain all 8 knight varriants (5 GW and 3 FW ones) Formations (Adlance) and special characters?

I can't imagine why they wouldn't put in formations in there (what else are they going to do to fill up space...), and there are some rumors about a named HQ. I don't know about the FW ones, but they'd certainly be welcome -- the same way FW models are in the Escalation book.

I WANT WD LEAKS !!!

 Talys wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Any word on the contents of the codex? Will it contain all 8 knight varriants (5 GW and 3 FW ones) Formations (Adlance) and special characters?

I can't imagine why they wouldn't put in formations in there (what else are they going to do to fill up space...), and there are some rumors about a named HQ. I don't know about the FW ones, but they'd certainly be welcome -- the same way FW models are in the Escalation book.

Escalation/Apoc was designed to allow for FW stuff to be used in normal games. If it's not plastic, it won't be in the Knight codex.

I expect 5 knight hulls- Paladin with battle cannon, Errant with Melta cannon, Warden with Quake cannon/gattling gun (It may be a decorated barrel tip rather than a bunch of barrels), Crusader with 2 ranged weapons, and new one with 2 CCW. Then all will have the option for a missile launcher or other thing on top as wargear upgrades.

Add say 2-5 freeblades, 2-3 formations, maybe option to pay points to promote one to a seneschal. Possibly rules based on if the knight is Imperial, Mechanicus, or Freeblade. Maybe even "titles" you can buy for the knight to upgrade it (which could be the cards in the datacard pack)

I do not expect the FW knights.

Wernt the FW knights added to the digital edition of the Knight Codex a while back though?

So will this be a separate kit or just repackage with the old sprues?

 Medium of Death wrote:
So will this be a separate kit or just repackage with the old sprues?

Think the rumor is that the new kit, can make all 5 of the variants, so probably the old sprues with new ones for the new bits for the new knights.

I wonder what the price rise will be?

 Medium of Death wrote:
I wonder what the price rise will be?

Current kit is 85£, new one is 95£

So $140 to proably $150 or so?

That's not too bad actually. Was expecting about a £20 increase.

I think it's going to be much more likely a $20+ price increase, though probably really not more than say $165. That way GW can net an extra $20 off each sale of a Knight. Everybody wins! And by everybody I just mean GW.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

 Medium of Death wrote:
So will this be a separate kit or just repackage with the old sprues?

Think the rumor is that the new kit, can make all 5 of the variants, so probably the old sprues with new ones for the new bits for the new knights.

There is certainly plenty of precedence for this... Think Rhino/Razorback.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

 Medium of Death wrote:
I wonder what the price rise will be?

Current kit is 85£, new one is 95£

So $140 to proably $150 or so?

It's $160.

They threw in a pair of sprues to the Baneblade and bumped it up in price. Now they threw a sprue in with the Knight and bumped it up in price. Maybe next we will see a pair of sprues thrown into the stompa kit with more weapon options and a belly gun, and that bumped in price to match the other Lord of War kits?

Wow, those silhouettes look awesome. It might be time to finally add some Imperial Knight allies to my Blood Angels force.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
They threw in a pair of sprues to the Baneblade and bumped it up in price. Now they threw a sprue in with the Knight and bumped it up in price. Maybe next we will see a pair of sprues thrown into the stompa kit with more weapon options and a belly gun, and that bumped in price to match the other Lord of War kits?

No good unless they update the Stompa rules too; I used one (plus infantry) in a game against two Knights (plus SM). On paper it was a balanced match in terms of points, HP, etc. and the the two chassis' are fairly even IMHO. Problem was the bloody Ion shields on the Knights, the Stompa was getting hull points whittled off, whereas the Knights don't. The Stompa either needs dropping back to it's old points or better, get some power fields.

I'm really surprised that it took this long for the new versions of the Knight to come out, it's a great model and has been really popular from what I've seen, I guess even GW couldn't stomach replacing a codex after only a few months. If only they'd put all the options in there in the first place.

 Jadenim wrote:

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
They threw in a pair of sprues to the Baneblade and bumped it up in price. Now they threw a sprue in with the Knight and bumped it up in price. Maybe next we will see a pair of sprues thrown into the stompa kit with more weapon options and a belly gun, and that bumped in price to match the other Lord of War kits?

No good unless they update the Stompa rules too; I used one (plus infantry) in a game against two Knights (plus SM). On paper it was a balanced match in terms of points, HP, etc. and the the two chassis' are fairly even IMHO. Problem was the bloody Ion shields on the Knights, the Stompa was getting hull points whittled off, whereas the Knights don't. The Stompa either needs dropping back to it's old points or better, get some power fields.

I'm really surprised that it took this long for the new versions of the Knight to come out, it's a great model and has been really popular from what I've seen, I guess even GW couldn't stomach replacing a codex after only a few months. If only they'd put all the options in there in the first place.

I worked around that by putting a mek with force field inside the Stompa. FW's Kustom Stompa can take Power Fields, they work like Void Shields, no reason not to take the Kustom as its so much better when configured correctly.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
They threw in a pair of sprues to the Baneblade and bumped it up in price. Now they threw a sprue in with the Knight and bumped it up in price. Maybe next we will see a pair of sprues thrown into the stompa kit with more weapon options and a belly gun, and that bumped in price to match the other Lord of War kits?

Let's not forget about a chaos-sprue consisting of comically ugly spikes, bumping the price a second time.

*drools*

Loving the look of it, I want several now!

Ok, I'll probably have to sell half my organs to make army but hey, it's completely 100% worth it. Right, right guys?

looks gnarly

Nice.

I like it, but I had hoped for more than different arms, heads and a launcher on top.
Different torso and or shoulder plates would have been nice.

I like that it looks different at least (thought it would be worse)

"Come here so I may grab you with my tiny hand!!"

Anyone else feel the Powerfist arm/hand should be bigger?

Uuuuu new shiny

Wicked. The head is brilliant and reminds me of the old reaver titan head

Aesthetically it's fine, pretty much as expected, but that pose is horrible. It's so similar to the other Knight model that you wonder why this didn't just come out at the same time (and then C: IK would have been a 4 unit book).

It looks like he's just walked into a bar and is standing there awkwardly after everyone's stopped to look at him.

Head pointing the same way as the gun, fist arm lowered and the fist itself clenched would be huge improvements.

This is epic news! i've got a knight in my 'to do' pile - i recon i can spread the parts from the new one to make two!!

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:

any word on the rules yet? Thanks for posting!! I had only seen the silhouettes so far

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:

That's beautiful.

Now how do I fit this into my Heretek army.....

Must be a left handed pilot.

Worst time ever for me to be expecting my 2nd child any day. Why didn't GW bring this out last year, when I had more disposable income?

Same model, ain't it?

 Hanskrampf wrote:
I like it, but I had hoped for more than different arms, heads and a launcher on top.
Different torso and or shoulder plates would have been nice.

Thing is, to change the carapace and pads would then upset the aesthetic with the shin pads, chest plate etc (unless you're going to keep the, looking similar and defeat the object.)

That would mean new sprues and more investment, and this is clearly an attempt to rejuvenate the sales of the kit at a minimum investment (not a criticism, I like it) so would never have been on the table.

Fenrir Kitsune wrote:Same model, ain't it?

sockwithaticket wrote:Aesthetically it's fine, pretty much as expected, but that pose is horrible. It's so similar to the other Knight model that you wonder why this didn't just come out at the same time (and then C: IK would have been a 4 unit book).

It looks like he's just walked into a bar and is standing there awkwardly after everyone's stopped to look at him.

Yep it looks like the same body / leg sprues as the original kit, just with new weapon and head options.

At this point GW's business plan is pretty much:
1. Find something that sells well
2. Do bare minimum extra work to make a 'new' version of it
3. Charge £10 more than last time

@xttz: So.. just about the same as every other company ever.

 Azreal13 wrote:
That would mean new sprues and more investment, and this is clearly an attempt to rejuvenate the sales of the kit at a minimum investment (not a criticism, I like it) so would never have been on the table.

I do wonder if when the original sprues were made if GW had any idea how popular it was going to be. I feel like they would have put a bit more effort in to making the legs somewhat pose-able. While I do like the Knight model on a whole, I really don't like the legs, and when you see so many of them all with the same legs it does really detract from the coolness factor.

 xttz wrote:

Fenrir Kitsune wrote:Same model, ain't it?

sockwithaticket wrote:Aesthetically it's fine, pretty much as expected, but that pose is horrible. It's so similar to the other Knight model that you wonder why this didn't just come out at the same time (and then C: IK would have been a 4 unit book).

It looks like he's just walked into a bar and is standing there awkwardly after everyone's stopped to look at him.

Yep it looks like the same body / leg sprues as the original kit, just with new weapon and head options.

At this point GW's business plan is pretty much:
1. Find something that sells well
2. Do bare minimum extra work to make a 'new' version of it
3. Charge £10 more than last time

The Imperial Knights will look the same frame wise, just like Space Marines will look pretty much the same.
Anyone thinking differently is setting themselves up for let down.
Forge World does not factor into this.
Getting salty about this just makes you look unreasonable, because again it is like saying "why do my new Space Wolves look the same as my old Space Wolves, Games Workshop is being lazy" "Why do my new Necrons look like my old Necrons, damn you Games Workshop you lazy scum!"
Imperial Knights are a design.

It looks awesome but they should've changed the legs, or made them pose able to start with. Now there's 4 (5?) variants that are all identically posed. It was my main gripe with the original and adding more variants has just exacerbated the issue.

 ImAGeek wrote:
It looks awesome but they should've changed the legs, or made them pose able to start with. Now there's 4 (5?) variants that are all identically posed. It was my main gripe with the original and adding more variants has just exacerbated the issue.

There is definitely a market out there for someone to make alternate legs for Imperial Knights until GW gets the memo.

Hey!

My old Space Wolves look quite different from the new ones. Otherwise i would not have bought them.
And my old metal Necron differ even more from all the plastic ones... :-)

New models that look a bit different, but good will be sold.
New models that look a bit different but do not look good will not be sold (unless they do too well in the game, then they will be sold or proxied ;-)

 angelofvengeance wrote:
@xttz: So.. just about the same as every other company ever.

except you forgot to mention usually its less content for more

 SJM wrote:
"Come here so I may grab you with my tiny hand!!"

Anyone else feel the Powerfist arm/hand should be bigger?

No way. I dislike the usually completely oversized powerfists. Seriously, especially infantry units look like champion masturbators with those. That one looks about big enough for the Knight without looking either too big or too small.

migooo wrote:

 angelofvengeance wrote:
@xttz: So.. just about the same as every other company ever.

except you forgot to mention usually its less content for more

Most likely not mentioned because that is what is called an opinion, which may not be shared with as many as you may believe.
Most in this thread (which is to talk about the new Knights) are looking forward to these new Knights, and when it is all said and done, you will find most will be happy with them and eager to get one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kosake wrote:

 SJM wrote:
"Come here so I may grab you with my tiny hand!!"

Anyone else feel the Powerfist arm/hand should be bigger?

No way. I dislike the usually completely oversized powerfists. Seriously, especially infantry units look like champion masturbators with those. That one looks about big enough for the Knight without looking either too big or too small.

Agreed, I would not want it to look all super anime disfigured style.
I was at first a but bleh on the power fist concept but I will say it looks good.

 BloodGrin wrote:


The Imperial Knights will look the same frame wise, just like Space Marines will look pretty much the same.
Anyone thinking differently is setting themselves up for let down.
Forge World does not factor into this.
Getting salty about this just makes you look unreasonable, because again it is like saying "why do my new Space Wolves look the same as my old Space Wolves, Games Workshop is being lazy" "Why do my new Necrons look like my old Necrons, damn you Games Workshop you lazy scum!"
Imperial Knights are a design.

Knights don't have to be identical, that's my point. Just look at the original material they're actively basing this on: http://heresyandheroes.com/2014/02/27/the-scope-of-knights/

A far more apt analogy would have been GW not bothering to make a distinct model for Terminators, and instead given us an alternative weapon and shoulder pauldrons for power armour. That's what they're doing here; consolidating several existing designs into a single homogeneous design. Nobody buys sci-fi wargames miniatures for functional efficiency, they're driven by imagination. And this release shows a distinct lack of it.

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:

Sweet, they used House Cadmus instead of Terryn.

I don't get all the fuss about cost increase frankly.

GW supplies you a product (imperial knight) for £85.

GW then spends money to design, develop, manufacture, repackage and promote this new addition, and in many peoples eyes, improvement to an existing model.

GW, being a business, then asks that to cover their costs you pay £10 (rumoured) per model extra.

To say its lazy on GW's part is silly, why reinvent the wheel when a simple update like this is perfectly acceptable? Its a fantastic model which now has more options.

Are GW supposed to do this for free?

Apple do it every year, adding minimal change to the I Phone and release a new, more expensive version and nobody complains at that.

Whilst i understand the rigid leg point, having made a number of these myself, it is a modelling hobby and i have seen plenty on people remodel the legs into different poses.

 BloodGrin wrote:

migooo wrote:

 angelofvengeance wrote:
@xttz: So.. just about the same as every other company ever.

except you forgot to mention usually its less content for more

Most likely not mentioned because that is what is called an opinion, which may not be shared with as many as you may believe.
Most in this thread (which is to talk about the new Knights) are looking forward to these new Knights, and when it is all said and done, you will find most will be happy with them and eager to get one.

You don't have tinned sweets there do you? every year the amount has gone down for in crease or the same price. But point taken.

 mixer86 wrote:
I don't get all the fuss about cost increase frankly.

GW supplies you a product (imperial knight) for £85.

GW then spends money to design, develop, manufacture, repackage and promote this new addition, and in many peoples eyes, improvement to an existing model.

GW, being a business, then asks that to cover their costs you pay £10 (rumoured) per model extra.

To say its lazy on GW's part is silly, why reinvent the wheel when a simple update like this is perfectly acceptable? Its a fantastic model which now has more options.

Are GW supposed to do this for free?

Apple do it every year, adding minimal change to the I Phone and release a new, more expensive version and nobody complains at that.

Whilst i understand the rigid leg point, having made a number of these myself, it is a modelling hobby and i have seen plenty on people remodel the legs into different poses.

+1 sir, for a very reasonable post and also:

migooo wrote:

 BloodGrin wrote:

migooo wrote:

 angelofvengeance wrote:
@xttz: So.. just about the same as every other company ever.

except you forgot to mention usually its less content for more

Most likely not mentioned because that is what is called an opinion, which may not be shared with as many as you may believe.
Most in this thread (which is to talk about the new Knights) are looking forward to these new Knights, and when it is all said and done, you will find most will be happy with them and eager to get one.

You don't have tinned sweets there do you? every year the amount has gone down for in crease or the same price. But point taken.

Don't get me started, US candy is so inferior to UK candy that it is a crime.
I would choke one of my co-workers out right now for a Boost bar or a Lion bar.
And I do know what you are saying about the tinned sweets, same thing does happen here as well as with other things that do the less for more revisions.

 angelofvengeance wrote:

 mixer86 wrote:
I don't get all the fuss about cost increase frankly.

GW supplies you a product (imperial knight) for £85.

GW then spends money to design, develop, manufacture, repackage and promote this new addition, and in many peoples eyes, improvement to an existing model.

GW, being a business, then asks that to cover their costs you pay £10 (rumoured) per model extra.

To say its lazy on GW's part is silly, why reinvent the wheel when a simple update like this is perfectly acceptable? Its a fantastic model which now has more options.

Are GW supposed to do this for free?

Apple do it every year, adding minimal change to the I Phone and release a new, more expensive version and nobody complains at that.

Whilst i understand the rigid leg point, having made a number of these myself, it is a modelling hobby and i have seen plenty on people remodel the legs into different poses.

+1 sir, for a very reasonable post and also:

Yeah, all very reasonable until you realise that GW currently spends around 24p for every pound they take in, including development costs etc..

When you consider a 4x return on investment is typical, spending a few extra quid on making a better/more distinct model seems well within their capabilities.

It's also completely missing the point. Nobody expects such products to be free, but they expect their RRP to bear some relation to production costs and consideration for the customer.

Moreover most of us expect price increases to be in line with inflation and/or have some sort of discernible rationale beyond 'because we can'. When this isn't the case, it tends to get people riled up.

A lot of it boils down to perception of value, you can see from a lot of responses here that a new weapon sprue that supplants the old one isn't worth £10 when the model is essentially the same.

 sockwithaticket wrote:
It's also completely missing the point. Nobody expects such products to be free, but they expect their RRP to bear some relation to production costs and consideration for the customer.

Moreover most of us expect price increases to be in line with inflation and/or have some sort of discernible rationale beyond 'because we can'. When this isn't the case, it tends to get people riled up.

A lot of it boils down to perception of value, you can see from a lot of responses here that a new weapon sprue that supplants the old one isn't worth £10 when the model is essentially the same.

We don't know yet whether it supplants or supplements the existing weapon sprue.

Considering that one of the loadouts has a Reaper Chainblade, I would think that they would have just packaged in the old sprue rather than put it on the new sprue.

 BloodGrin wrote:

 xttz wrote:

Fenrir Kitsune wrote:Same model, ain't it?

sockwithaticket wrote:Aesthetically it's fine, pretty much as expected, but that pose is horrible. It's so similar to the other Knight model that you wonder why this didn't just come out at the same time (and then C: IK would have been a 4 unit book).

It looks like he's just walked into a bar and is standing there awkwardly after everyone's stopped to look at him.

Yep it looks like the same body / leg sprues as the original kit, just with new weapon and head options.

At this point GW's business plan is pretty much:
1. Find something that sells well
2. Do bare minimum extra work to make a 'new' version of it
3. Charge £10 more than last time

The Imperial Knights will look the same frame wise, just like Space Marines will look pretty much the same.
Anyone thinking differently is setting themselves up for let down.
Forge World does not factor into this.
Getting salty about this just makes you look unreasonable, because again it is like saying "why do my new Space Wolves look the same as my old Space Wolves, Games Workshop is being lazy" "Why do my new Necrons look like my old Necrons, damn you Games Workshop you lazy scum!"
Imperial Knights are a design.

Fair enough, but I'm only a casual follower and can't see whats the difference between the old model and this one? New weapons? What is it?

*Edit: The source is Garro on http://heresy30k.invisionzone.com/ *

Not sure where this is from, it was posted a few minutes ago on the german GW-Fanworld forum

Storm666

From the HH-Forum:

ok got some rules glimpses.
the gatling cannon is 36" str6 ap3 heavy12, rending

missile launcher has two versions

ironstorm: 72" str5 ap4 heavy1,large blast, barrage
stormspear: 48" str8 ap3 heavy3

the weapons profile also lists a twinlinked icarus autocannon (could be the other carapace mounted option seen in the silhouettes)

the fist is bloody funny.
strD AP2, and strikes at I1. but if it kills a vehicle or monstrous creature then it can throw the corpse at an enemy unit, damage caused is effected by the stats of what's being thrown.

Okay...being able to kill a unit and then throw it at another unit? It's stupid but I love it.

It was posted by Garro on http://heresy30k.invisionzone.com/

Warhams-77 wrote:
It was posted by Garro on http://heresy30k.invisionzone.com/

I am not a member of that forum and thus can not see anything there, so translate what that should mean.
And is there any more said?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Points cost?

 Sidstyler wrote:
Okay...being able to kill a unit and then throw it at another unit? It's stupid but I love it.

This is so fething stupid it crashed the y-axis on the stupid scale and entered the awesome-scale from the top.

BloodGrin, I have no access either

Only this pic


Ninja'ed

Damnit GW.

I don't need a second Knight, but the ability to hurl a transport?

I'm excited. 3 of these too please Then I'll have 6 for total for my knight household. They'll just look cool all painted up even if I only use 2-3 at any given time and even then it's not that often

If one of those Knights is not a Thunderstrike Gauntlet equipped Knight painted green with purple leg plating, you will not live up to your forum name Hulksmash...

Hulksmash angry! Hulksmash HURL!

Stick a Hulk face bumper on his arm

New knight and datacards from Atia at B&C

Thanks, Wilson

Edit: Your first link doesnt work, this one is better

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:

Sploosh.

 Kanluwen wrote:
If one of those Knights is not a Thunderstrike Gauntlet equipped Knight painted green with purple leg plating, you will not live up to your forum name Hulksmash...

That'll be a special for fun model with 2 gauntlets painted correctly and no guns. It'll be amazing

Assuming the existing two knights can take the carapace mounted weapons I foresee a booming 3rd party aftermarket for them.

The new chaingun is better than the castigator - 36", Heavy 12, S6, AP3 vs. 36" Heavy 8, S7, SP3. Hopefully FW will bring theirs in line with some updated rules.