Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

T8 is actually why it's so cheap as it can be wounded by S5. It essentially gives it an AV of 11. Granted armour and FNP help now but as it can get wounded by a heavy bolter/pulse rifle that makes it weaker in ways to even a dreadnought. WK are solid but not that bad and my own has only ever survived 1 match and even then it had 1 wound left. The damn thing has got such a bad rep that I've stopped using it and LOW at all now.

There are about the same number of things that can hurt a WK that can't hurt an IK as vice versa. So bringing up things that can't hurt one or the other just invites argument

Str 5, Poison & Fleshbane have no effect on AV12+, yet things like Haywire, Melta & Lance have no bonus vs models with T.
However, since Melta and Lance weapons are almost all str 8 AP1/2, they are still good ways to hurt a WK. This is probably GWs thinking: "There are twice as many weapons that can hurt a WK than can hurt an IK. WK should be cheaper than IKs" Just a guess
Haywire is the only weapon I can think of that can hurt a vehicle that can't hurt a WK, unless the Haywire weapon is Str 5+ naturally (which some are).

Kryczek - you just helped prove my point

A single wraithknight is fine as it is.
It's only when multiples are taken it becomes an issue for people to deal with.

 Galef wrote:
There are about the same number of things that can hurt a WK that can't hurt an IK as vice versa. So bringing up things that can't hurt one or the other just invites argument

Str 5, Poison & Fleshbane have no effect on AV12+, yet things like Haywire, Melta & Lance have no bonus vs models with T.
However, since Melta and Lance weapons are almost all str 8 AP1/2, they are still good ways to hurt a WK. This is probably GWs thinking: "There are twice as many weapons that can hurt a WK than can hurt an IK. WK should be cheaper than IKs" Just a guess
Haywire is the only weapon I can think of that can hurt a vehicle that can't hurt a WK, unless the Haywire weapon is Str 5+ naturally (which some are).

They forgot to compute the possibility of those things actually hurting the WK. FNP should be a 75 pt upgrade, not free.

 Jackal wrote:


It's only when multiples are taken it becomes an issue for people to deal with.

And that's not a WK-exclusive issue, either.

345-350 should be...okay. It definitely isn't worth 100+ points but it is too cheap as is.

I think it would be interesting if the stock WK was 350pts for this:
Suncannon/Shield, 2 Shuricannons

Swap either Shuricannon for Scatter Laser or Star Cannon for free.
Swap Suncannon for Glaive for free
Swap Suncannon & Shield for 2 Wraithcannons for 25pts

The Wraithlord comes stock with 2 catapults or flamer, the WK should come with 2 shoulder weapons as well.
Since the First draft FAQ clarifies that GMCs can fire all their weapons, I haven't made a list without putting at least 1 shoulder gun on my WK.

--

Well, it's the next day, and so far, we have the following results:

20% of poll respondents are trolls.
6% think the WK is fine as is...or else answered it inappropriately (I'm looking at you, Galef! )
8% think a relatively minor points increase is called for.
67% think that the WK's points cost needs to skyrocket.

This is about what I would be led to expect based on the poll results in the "Is your army cheesetastic" thread.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Galef wrote:
I think it would be interesting if the stock WK was 350pts for this:
Suncannon/Shield, 2 Shuricannons

Swap either Shuricannon for Scatter Laser or Star Cannon for free.
Swap Suncannon for Glaive for free
Swap Suncannon & Shield for 2 Wraithcannons for 25pts

A wraithknight with suncannon, shield and 2 shuricannons already costs 325 points.

Likewise scatter lasers. And two starcannons will take you to 335.

You're saying that the WK only needs a point increase ranging from 15-25, unless it uses ranged D.

That's just patently false...

...

Unless we go with your idea of stripping a wound from the wraithknight and nerfing its weapons.

Then that might be fair.

when I wsaw who made this thread I knew it would be the WK kill my marines and so should be nefted, a single marine should be able to kill 6 wraithknights etc. they should be about 350 though and IK are better than wk in general btu the wk is better at what it is equipped to do ie cc with sword or long range with the cannons

 G00fySmiley wrote:
when I wsaw who made this thread I knew it would be the WK kill my marines and so should be nefted, a single marine should be able to kill 6 wraithknights etc. they should be about 350 though and IK are better than wk in general btu the wk is better at what it is equipped to do ie cc with sword or long range with the cannons

Imperial knights have worse saves (assuming scattershield on the WK) and have the possibility of losing multiple wounds due to an Explodes! result on the vehicle damage table.

Traditio wrote:

 G00fySmiley wrote:
when I wsaw who made this thread I knew it would be the WK kill my marines and so should be nefted, a single marine should be able to kill 6 wraithknights etc. they should be about 350 though and IK are better than wk in general btu the wk is better at what it is equipped to do ie cc with sword or long range with the cannons

Imperial knights have worse saves (assuming scattershield on the WK) and have the possibility of losing multiple wounds due to an Explodes! result on the vehicle damage table.

WK lose multiple wounds to Instant Death.

Generally speaking, WK's are around 100pts under priced. When you throw in the fact that they now have Stomp and 2 ranged D weapons it becomes laughable to play against these guys. When another player brings a super heavy against a WK the Eldar player probably has to hide his glee at the easy kill he is about to achieve.

OF course I am also one of those old gamers who thinks that GMC and Super Heavies shouldn't be allowed in 40k.

pm713 wrote:WK lose multiple wounds to Instant Death.

I'm inclined to think that AP 1 and 2 are more common than things that can deal ID vs. a wraithknight.

Traditio wrote:
Well, it's the next day, and so far, we have the following results:

20% of poll respondents are trolls.
6% think the WK is fine as is...or else answered it inappropriately (I'm looking at you, Galef! )
8% think a relatively minor points increase is called for.
67% think that the WK's points cost needs to skyrocket.

Alternatively:

20% of respondents disagree with you
6% think it's okay (with or without adjustments)
8% think it's a bit undercosted
67% are trolls

Data is fun!

Maybe the issue isn't that the WK is undercosted, but that IK's are overcosted because *vehicles*. The WK having better saves is situational, as well.

However, if you assume scattershield on the WK, then it doesn't have ranged D. Is it's base still undercosted?

It seems like the survivability of a WK is what makes people think it's undercosted, not necessarily the damage output. At least, that's the impression I'm starting to get. But a T8 with a 3+ and *maybe (probably usually)* a 5++ with 6W and FNP. If it has the 5++, its only options are either melee-only D, or a Heavy 3 small blast with AP2. Is 295 absolutely too little to pay for those to be the only two choices?

Remember, we're talking about base, not adding any additional guns, which does add points to the cost. 350 might be fair for the base loadouts, but I'm thinking the additional cost comes mostly from the survivability, I'm not as sold that it needs an increase due to offensive capabilities.

15-25 points more on the base might be fair, as well. How is that "patently false?" The knight gallant costs 325, and though you can say it's defenses are worse than a WK, it has melee D as well as ranged fire. WK gets one or the other. Does the stubber make up for a 5++ and a FNP? Probably not. But even though vehicle rules are poor, there are still advantages as well.

Traditio wrote:
Well, it's the next day, and so far, we have the following results...

OP still trollin' hard.


Having gone through this and the cheese thread, I think I'm going to ignore OP from here on out. There's nothing to be gained, I believe.

Traditio wrote:
Well, it's the next day, and so far, we have the following results:

20% of poll respondents are trolls.
6% think the WK is fine as is...or else answered it inappropriately (I'm looking at you, Galef! )
8% think a relatively minor points increase is called for.
67% think that the WK's points cost needs to skyrocket.

This is about what I would be led to expect based on the poll results in the "Is your army cheesetastic" thread.



Then that might be fair.

Traditio I really don't know how you can claim knowledge of what percentage of poll respondents are trolling.

BossJakadakk wrote:Alternatively:

20% of respondents disagree with you
6% think it's okay (with or without adjustments)
8% think it's a bit undercosted
67% are trolls

Very unlikely. In any given internet community, the trolls, I am willing to wager, are generally in the minority (there are exception to this, I am sure).

It's much more likely that 20% of respondent are trolls than 67%.

It seems like the survivability of a WK is what makes people think it's undercosted, not necessarily the damage output. At least, that's the impression I'm starting to get. But a T8 with a 3+ and *maybe (probably usually)* a 5++ with 6W and FNP. If it has the 5++, its only options are either melee-only D, or a Heavy 3 small blast with AP2. Is 295 absolutely too little to pay for those to be the only two choices?

It's able to run around and kill things with complete impunity for at least a couple of turns. If you manage to take out the thing that can hurt the wraithknight, it can basically just delete problem units for the entire game without real fear of retaliation.

In the SM codex, literally the only way to counter a WK is either: 1. grav spam or 2. drop pod grav or 3. grav-centurion plus librarians.

Are you getting the commonality?

15-25 points more on the base might be fair, as well. How is that "patently false?" The knight gallant costs 325

I think that IKs are also undercosted.

Evidence?

Some people consider them an auto-take.

If it' an auto-take, it's probably undercosted.

 BossJakadakk wrote:

Maybe the issue isn't that the WK is undercosted, but that IK's are overcosted because *vehicles*. The WK having better saves is situational, as well.

However, if you assume scattershield on the WK, then it doesn't have ranged D. Is it's base still undercosted?

It seems like the survivability of a WK is what makes people think it's undercosted, not necessarily the damage output. At least, that's the impression I'm starting to get. But a T8 with a 3+ and *maybe (probably usually)* a 5++ with 6W and FNP. If it has the 5++, its only options are either melee-only D, or a Heavy 3 small blast with AP2. Is 295 absolutely too little to pay for those to be the only two choices?

Remember, we're talking about base, not adding any additional guns, which does add points to the cost. 350 might be fair for the base loadouts, but I'm thinking the additional cost comes mostly from the survivability, I'm not as sold that it needs an increase due to offensive capabilities.

It needs a huge boost in points simply because of the survivability. If the cheapest Knight(the Knight Gallant, outfitted with one weapon that can only strike at I1 and forces the Knight to pile-in at I1) is 325, then the base Wraithknight should be 375 at least.--or Wraithknights should only be able to be brought in as part of a unique Detachment ala Knights to prevent them from getting the benefits of the main Detachment.

15-25 points more on the base might be fair, as well. How is that "patently false?" The knight gallant costs 325, and though you can say it's defenses are worse than a WK, it has melee D as well as ranged fire. WK gets one or the other. Does the stubber make up for a 5++ and a FNP? Probably not. But even though vehicle rules are poor, there are still advantages as well.

What advantages do vehicles have that GMCs don't?

Superheavy vehicles remain vulnerable to Haywire, Grav, Melta, and Armourbane.
GMCs gain an effective immunity to Poison, Sniper, and Instant Death(both the skill and from being doubled out T). They remain vulnerable to Grav...but that's in 4 books total(Cult Mechanicus, Blood Angels, Dark Angels, and Space Marines).

I mean, I guess if you're concerned about Leadership related powers or something for Psykers then I guess GMCs have a weakness...but those things aren't exactly common. So absolutely WKs should be raised in price to 375 minimum.

Traditio wrote:

BossJakadakk wrote:Alternatively:

20% of respondents disagree with you
6% think it's okay (with or without adjustments)
8% think it's a bit undercosted
67% are trolls

Very unlikely. In any given internet community, the trolls, I am willing to wager, are generally in the minority (there are exception to this, I am sure).

It's much more likely that 20% of respondent are trolls than 67%.

Or you've just made yourself such a big target lately that a larger-than-normal portion of posters have decided to troll you.

On the topic of the wraithknight, it is pretty painfully obvious (to me) especially when you see one in a lowish points game that they are the best 295 points you could ever spend. It gets laughable when you see one in a relic, purge, or empy's will game against any army without grav.

niv-mizzet wrote:Or you've just made yourself such a big target lately that a larger-than-normal portion of posters have decided to troll you.

Probably.

That said, I am delighted to note that, in spite of various posters insisting that there's no such thing as a consensus, no such thing as "the public opinion" about things like what a WK should cost, and even in spite of the efforts of the trolls to troll my poll, in fact, the statistical median is pretty much right where I've been insisting it should be.

Roughly half of all poll respondents think that the WK should cost in between 350 and 449 points.

Take the average of that, and that's 400 points.

Just like I've been saying.

See? The public agrees with me, despite the protests of the very vocal outlying minority who like to argue against me.

And anyone saying it should be 445+ points is a troll, just like the people saying it should cost less.

Because I say so. See how bad your argument is?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
And anyone saying it should be 445+ points is a troll, just like the people saying it should cost less.

Because I say so. See how bad your argument is?

That's just it, though. Let us assume that everyone who answered more than 449 points is trolling.

350-449 got basically half of the vote.

20% of poll respondents are trolls.

Do you always wear blinkers or are you simply the troll in this thread?
I voted they are fine as they were and am in no way a troll.

I am simply able to drop a wraithknight without having to cry cheese.
Yes, they are strong, no, they are not 350+ points strong.

The only time they are really an issue is when people run 2-3, then they become a real pain to deal with.

No worse than triptide when it started, or the old lash/oblit spam when that was about.



The main issue is the Eldar book is solid, more so compared to a few of the others, so making a tough list from the book isn't as hard as you have plenty of decent options.
The wraithknight is simply a strong option from the book.

And if in this day and age you can't bring a single wraithknight down, its more of an issue with your own list or play style.

Because then those would be the only options because everyone is a troll. As soon as you dismiss options (ones you created, remember), everyone is a troll because you can't actually filter who is serious and who isn't.

Therefore, the only truthful people are clearly the people saying it should stay the same cost.

Traditio wrote:

niv-mizzet wrote:Or you've just made yourself such a big target lately that a larger-than-normal portion of posters have decided to troll you.

Probably.

That said, I am delighted to note that, in spite of various posters insisting that there's no such thing as a consensus, no such thing as "the public opinion" about things like what a WK should cost, and even in spite of the efforts of the trolls to troll my poll, in fact, the statistical median is pretty much right where I've been insisting it should be.

Roughly half of all poll respondents think that the WK should cost in between 350 and 449 points.

Take the average of that, and that's 400 points.

Just like I've been saying.

See? The public agrees with me, despite the protests of the very vocal outlying minority who like to argue against me.

Okay benefit of the doubt time. If it was house ruled in your games to be 400pts would you be happy for WK's to be fielded against your bare bones marines?

Jackal wrote:Do you always wear blinkers or are you simply the troll in this thread?
I voted they are fine as they were and am in no way a troll.

I'm not claiming that the respondent are trolling who claim that WKs are fine as is.

I'm claiming that the respondents are trolling who claim that WKs should be cheaper.

I am simply able to drop a wraithknight without having to cry cheese.
Yes, they are strong, no, they are not 350+ points strong.

And if in this day and age you can't bring a single wraithknight down, its more of an issue with your own list or play style.

On average, out of all krak missiles fired at a WK by a space marine (not assuming combat doctrines), only one in:

2/3 X 1/2 X 2/3 X 1/6 (4/108 = 2/54 = 1/27).

It takes 27 krak missiles to take out a wraithknight. And that's assuming no scatter shield.

Assuming scattershield, only 2 in 81 krak missiles will take down a wraithknight.

Let's do the math for lascannons:

2/3 X 2/3 X 2/3 X 1/6 = 8/162 = 4/81.

Roughly 20 lacannon shots to take down a wraithknight. Not counting a scatter shield. If we count the shield, it would take:

8/243. It would basically take 30 lascannon shoots to take down a wraithknight.

It would take an identical number of melta shots to take down a wraithknight as krak missiles.

I am in agreement with Traditio. 350 is even a little soft in my opinion.

Considering a Morkanaut w KFF is 280 the WK is the single most undercosted unit in 40k that I can think of.

Regarding some earlier arguments, I believe it will take 81 shots of Str 5 or 6 at a BS of 4 to strip 6 wounds from a wraith knight.

W = 6
T = 8
Sv = 3+
FNP = 5+
S = Shots
To Hit = 3+
To Wound = 6+

Hits_Inflicted = (Shots)(4/6)
Wounds_Inflicted = (Hits_Inflicted)(1/6)
Unsaved_Wounds = (Wounds_Inflicted)[(4/6)+(2/6)(2/6)]

6=(Shots)(4/6)(1/6)[(4/6)+(2/6)(2/6)]

About 81 Str 5 or 6 shots at BS4. That would be 20 Scatter Bikes...

If it was Str 10 AP1 shot by BS 3 (Tau). It would take 17 shots. Think about that... you have stuff in your army that can put out 17 Str10 AP1 shots before a wraithknight rips through your lines? Anything ANYTHING that WK gets in combat with is dead with the exception of dedicated CC deathstar.

doktor_g wrote:Regarding some earlier arguments, I believe it will take 81 shots of Str 5 or 6 at a BS of 4 to strip 6 wounds from a wraith knight.

False. Assuming scatter bikes, it would take:

2/3 (BS 4) X 1/6 (S6) X 1/3 (3+ save) X 2/3 (FNP) X 1/6 (6 wounds) to take out a wraithknight

4/972 = 2/486 = 1/243

It would take 243 scatter laser shots (roughly 60 scatter laser volleys at 4 shots each) to take out a wraithknight.

 Jackal wrote:

20% of poll respondents are trolls.

And if in this day and age you can't bring a single wraithknight down, its more of an issue with your own list or play style.

Dont go there man! Traditio thinks that changing his list to accommodate yours means your army is OP...

Mr. Burning wrote:Okay benefit of the doubt time. If it was house ruled in your games to be 400pts would you be happy for WK's to be fielded against your bare bones marines?

1. My marines aren't bare-bone. I field them mostly with missile launchers, lascannons and plasma cannons. That's not "bare bones." If your idea of bare bones is "without grav, librarians or drop pods," then that's symptomatic of game imbalance.

2. No. Even at 400 points, the WK is simply too durable. A 100 points difference would mean that the Eldar player could take fewer things in his army, sure, but the WK would still be able to run around and kill things with impunity.

Superheavies don't belong in non-apocalypse games. Period.