BrookM wrote: Right, the Knight Lance was just clarified again: You must have three big Knights to get your CP's.
So...what purpose do Armigers serve? Because right now they seem pretty pointless.
For shooting stuff your knights are better off not shooting at, and to fill up remaining points. Armigers were never meant to be center pieces.
Not meant to be centrepieces =/= doesn’t contribute as functional “troops”.
Bingo. I was hoping for ways to be able to run LOTS of Knights in a functional army. Because that is what I want to have. KNIGHTS. Not a ton of frickin' Guard.
It’s actually completely against the philosophy of command points: CP are to reward you for taking troops instead of going all-in on big flashy things. You’d think the equivalent design space here would be to encourage people to take the chaff knights instead of going all-in on huge minor titans.
BrookM wrote: Right, the Knight Lance was just clarified again: You must have three big Knights to get your CP's.
So...what purpose do Armigers serve? Because right now they seem pretty pointless.
For shooting stuff your knights are better off not shooting at, and to fill up remaining points. Armigers were never meant to be center pieces.
Not meant to be centrepieces =/= doesn’t contribute as functional “troops”.
Bingo. I was hoping for ways to be able to run LOTS of Knights in a functional army. Because that is what I want to have. KNIGHTS. Not a ton of frickin' Guard.
It’s actually completely against the philosophy of command points: CP are to reward you for taking troops instead of going all-in on big flashy things. You’d think the equivalent design space here would be to encourage people to take the chaff knights instead of going all-in on huge minor titans.
The whole argument of CP being backwards and meant as a way to incetivize taking troops would be a lot more valid if troop hordes weren't, by almost every standard, even more powerful than an average army, let alone and incredibly elite one.
Cephalobeard wrote: The whole argument of CP being backwards and meant as a way to incetivize taking troops would be a lot more valid if troop hordes weren't, by almost every standard, even more powerful than an average army, let alone and incredibly elite one.
Oh absolutely, but I don’t think they -intended- to make individually worthless chaff infantry overpowered by raw weight of numbers.
gungo wrote: You also can’t make your knight a warlord unless it’s a character. So 3 knights in a superheavy detachment and 6 armigers in another 2 SH detachments. If that doesn’t work then you effectively killed knight armies.
I wonder if that includes Canis Rex, since he is already a character. He was going to be my Warlord in my Ad Mech/Knights army.
well he has a warlord trait so he’s good. You just can’t choose your trait such as he invul one.
BrookM wrote: Right, the Knight Lance was just clarified again: You must have three big Knights to get your CP's.
So...what purpose do Armigers serve? Because right now they seem pretty pointless.
For shooting stuff your knights are better off not shooting at, and to fill up remaining points. Armigers were never meant to be center pieces.
Not meant to be centrepieces =/= doesn’t contribute as functional “troops”.
Bingo. I was hoping for ways to be able to run LOTS of Knights in a functional army. Because that is what I want to have. KNIGHTS. Not a ton of frickin' Guard.
It’s actually completely against the philosophy of command points: CP are to reward you for taking troops instead of going all-in on big flashy things. You’d think the equivalent design space here would be to encourage people to take the chaff knights instead of going all-in on huge minor titans.
I do want to run big Knights too. I had already planned on running three big Knights in my Knight army.
I was planning on a dominus, two questoris and three armigers, with the dominus and one knight with an armiger and the last knight with the two other armigers, but now i might just run four Questoris Knights instead, or 3/4 Cerastus and a Questoris depending on points. (Hopefully they let me run 4 Cerastus in 2000 in the next CA...)
I do want to run big Knights too. I had already planned on running three big Knights in my Knight army.
My plan was one Dominus, as many Normal IK as possible, and Armigers to fill in the gaps so that I had two Superheavy Detachments for a total of 9CP. Now I don't need Armigers at all. 5 Knights and some guard. If I can spare 360pts for two guard battalions so much the better.
Is this confirmed or all rumors because it seems like requiring ONE big knight to get warlord and cp makes sense not requiring 3 of the same thing (spam much gw? Thought you wanted to end that)
Speaking as a SOUP player, I am digging all this. A pure knight army is just too one dimensional. It has always been bad and they nerfed the lance/character rules to make it an impossibility. It would have been nice if armigers gave 1CP a piece and unlocked characters ... but GW gonna GW. I could see a 2 melee armiger plus 1 gallant TERRYN detachment doing some work if you have 2 other battalions to feed them CP. Even a baby knight could do work if it swings twice. And +2" to move and charge, uh yeah, that helps melee knights a lot. This might be enough to get my knights off the shelf and onto the table. TERRYN + STYGIES + BLANGELS, or maybe TERRYN + CADIA + BLANGELS, or perhaps TERRYN can do smash captains job and I can run TERRYN + STYGIES + min-CADIA. Either way, GW is railroading competitive players into running multiple codexies.
EDIT: 3x TERRYN gallants + minBattalion-BLANGEL + minBattalion-CADIA. That would a LOL army. Get ready for some big assault phases. Captain smash dies, swings twice. Spare captain honors the chapter. TERRYN honors the chapter and swings twice. You could spend all 16CP on the first turn to bring the emperors holy wrath.
You also can’t make your knight a warlord unless it’s a character. So 3 knights in a superheavy detachment and 6 armigers in another 2 SH detachments. If that doesn’t work then you effectively killed knight armies.
That nets you 6 total CP. 3 for the first SH detachment and 3 for battleforged. For 180 pts you can get some Guard bubble wrap that give you 5cp.
No I think Guard battalion is better but I’m thinking pure knight armies and how to make it viable. I’m hoping the podcast guys are confused and this army gets all CP but needs a triple knight list to use the strategems.
I do want to run big Knights too. I had already planned on running three big Knights in my Knight army.
My plan was one Dominus, as many Normal IK as possible, and Armigers to fill in the gaps so that I had two Superheavy Detachments for a total of 9CP. Now I don't need Armigers at all. 5 Knights and some guard. If I can spare 360pts for two guard battalions so much the better.
I don't really see the point of Armigers anymore. Sure, you can run a pair and it will allow you to fill up some points, but if they don't work toward getting you CP, I would rather just run another Knight.
gendoikari87 wrote: Wait on the long war they said there was a strat that made them warlords
So you can pay more of the CP that you don't have to get the Warlord you should already get?!
8 cp is enough for my army to function the way I want to build it if that strat is 2cp or less. So I’m cool at that point. Armigers aren’t useless without cp they’re smaller and that in and of itself is an advantage. Less putting all chickens in one basket
gendoikari87 wrote: Wait on the long war they said there was a strat that made them warlords
So you can pay more of the CP that you don't have to get the Warlord you should already get?!
8 cp is enough for my army to function the way I want to build it if that strat is 2cp or less. So I’m cool at that point. Armigers aren’t useless without cp they’re smaller and that in and of itself is an advantage. Less putting all chickens in one basket
As long as Canis Rex remains a character and can be the Warlord regardless of how many other Knights I run (be it that he is a Freeblade, I would place money on him being able to do that since otherwise he wouldn't have a Warlord Trait assigned to him). But the composition of my other Knight Detachment just changed drastically though. A Valiant and two Wardens probably. My Warglaives are probably going away.
My allies for my Ad Mech are probably going to just be two Wardens instead of a Warden and two Armigers.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Danit wrote: Dominus should be worth 2 big knights :/
Or if you do a SH Detachment with three big Knights, you should get bonus CP.
And now I am thinking I might be better served by a Castellan than a Valiant. But HARPOON GUN!
I’m taking the long war podcast as a grain of salt that rule as explained sounds poorly thought out. I can see requireing multiple knights to make one a character with the warlord strat exception. But the SH detachment doesn’t grant CP for armigers or 1 knight 2 armigers units is just so far outside Gw current design and convoluted.
3 knights, 6 armigers 12 cp and a single character warlord is hardly a competitive army.
Or
1 dominus, 2 knights and several armigers.
None of these lists are issues under current 8th edition
It’s also not like any of these units can abuse character targeting rules either. None of it makes sense as explained.
gungo wrote: I’m taking the long war podcast as a grain of salt that rule as explained sounds poorly thought out. I can see requireing multiple knights to make one a character with the warlord strat exception. But the SH detachment doesn’t grant CP for armigers or 1 knight 2 armigers units is just so far outside Gw current design and convoluted.
3 knights, 6 armigers 12 cp and a single character warlord is hardly a competitive army.
Or
1 dominus, 2 knights and several armigers.
None of these lists are issues under current 8th edition
It’s also not like any of these units can abuse character targeting rules either. None of it makes sense as explained.
unless gw has royally screwed up and made a super abuseable strat or warlord trait or something and refused to remove it. Only way that makes sense
And hence the arguments that guard are OP. Well if their goal was to get me to purchase less Knights, Goal accomplished.
Most armies have access to something similar, if not in Codex than via an ally. I actually kind of think the Imperium situation is one of the best designed options for this. Rather than create a cheap troop choice for every possible Imperium army by coming up with things like Scouts or Trainees or something, you create a thematically proper cheap unit for everyone. Moreover, you don't double down on the Scout problem of giving them something that fights for design space with more iconic baseline troops. I mean, if GW spun out Mek's into their own army of expensive robo-Orks, I'd not bat an eye to see them allied with a detachment of Boyz.
Only caught part of the WTV stream game, but, the autocannons sounded nice @ 3dmg.
Holding off any further thoughts until i listen to the Tabletop Tactics review and game later - supposedly being released at midnight.
The whole "3 big Knights or no Character" hurts a bit. You'd expect the smaller Knightly Houses to still be lead by a "leader" even if they have to rely more on Armigers and a limited amount of bigger platforms. Mainly hurts though, due to you now being super restricted when it comes to relics.
Maybe the freeblades will always be characters? If the Canis Rex is one, the others you can build might be too. Unless that's already been confirmed untrue. Information is kinda pouring in from so many places it's hard to keep track.
mmzero252 wrote: Maybe the freeblades will always be characters? If the Canis Rex is one, the others you can build might be too. Unless that's already been confirmed untrue. Information is kinda pouring in from so many places it's hard to keep track.
True, and not all of it is complete or accurate! Really have to be patient and wait for the book.
If Freeblades are automatically characters then that's certainly a way to have a warlord with knights and not need 3 big ones. It would be a good balance to the armigers not giving CPs.
LunarSol wrote: I thought that got corrected that Armigers give CP, but don't let you take characters?
Some one apparently later chimed in that it was verified that Armigers do not give CP when mixed with a regular Knight. At this point, I'm going to wait until I see it with my eyes....
Yeah, I'm currently mostly just interested in finding out how the point changes affect my existing Knight, as I'm unlikely to buy into any of the new ones right away.
LunarSol wrote: I thought that got corrected that Armigers give CP, but don't let you take characters?
Some one apparently later chimed in that it was verified that Armigers do not give CP when mixed with a regular Knight. At this point, I'm going to wait until I see it with my eyes....
It seems super odd given gw has been saying armigers are the perfect way to fill out a superheavy detach
Because apparently GW doesn't want to sell Baby Knights? But probably also so people are screwed out of taking a SH Detachment alongside another sizeable army.
I agree. If Armigers 100% don't give CP, then, i'm not really sure what the point of them is outside of a pure Knight list.
Having them with Admech for example, will now become pretty pointless as you will just choose 3 Onagers. Sure, they can be taken as an Auxilary, but, there still isn't much of a reason to take 3 of them.
In a pure Knight army, with 3 normal Knights costing ~450 (based on the new Character being said to be 450), you can still only fit in potentially 4 Armigers, or turn it up for 4 Knights and 1 Armiger. At that point, you're still going to be stuck with a 6CP army no matter what you decide.
As for bumping up the CP bonus of the Super Heavy detachment, i'd be ok with this IF, and ONLY IF, the added bonus came as a result of maxing out the detachment.
Having 1500 points of 3 Baneblades backed up by 2 battalions of infantry for 20CP isn't something anyone really wants to face.
Honestly I’d find Armigers still fairly useful outside a knight army given a superheavy detachment can be one superheavy. Warglaives and Helverins fill roles that, for example, admech doesn’t perfectly replicate.
That, or they should make some Knight-only detachments with their own CP/detachment etc. That might have made more sense. Or add a stipulation that if the SHD is in a Knights-only force, it has 5 CP (or something). There are ways to restrict abuse by making it more specific to the force.
Because each min guard battalion is 180pts, absolute minimum.
TERRYN - 1200 points of 3x gallants with rockets CADIA - 200 point battalion and CP farm, put bodies on backfield objectives or in non-los ruins. BLANGELS - 500 points 2x blangels heros with 3x scouts to hide and camp objectives
That leaves 100 points to spare on upgrades and whatnot. If knights can hit stuff in ruins as rumored, and knights got some kind of sweep attack as rumored, hell yeah that looks like fun. The smash captains can take care of fliers and stuff in buildings. The knights run around eating things and double swinging when you have the CP for it.
Because each min guard battalion is 180pts, absolute minimum.
TERRYN - 1200 points of 3x gallants with rockets
CADIA - 200 point battalion and CP farm, put bodies on backfield objectives or in non-los ruins.
BLANGELS - 500 points 2x blangels heros with 3x scouts to hide and camp objectives
That leaves 100 points to spare on upgrades and whatnot. If knights can hit stuff in ruins as rumored, and knights got some kind of sweep attack as rumored, hell yeah that looks like fun. The smash captains can take care of fliers and stuff in buildings. The knights run around eating things and double swinging when you have the CP for it.
Wulfey, forgive me, because I'm confused.
Those are, definitely, point values. However, they're neither 3 Baneblades nor 1500pts worth of detachments. Why was I quoted? Lol
Sry, nvm, I figured you were quietly referencing my post on the other page. Yeah, nothing about baneblades. Cheapest shadowsword is like 420-430 points. Most run 540 with 4x lascannon hvBolter sponsons.
Dominating the battlefield with their size and firepower, Imperial Knights are towering bipedal weapons platforms that hold no quarter in eliminating their targets – but like anything else, they are vulnerable to the dark clutches of Chaos. The Freeblade Knight once known as the Living Litany is an unfortunate example; nobody knows what truly happened to this once-valiant hero, only that it has renamed itself Litany of Destruction, and has been leaving a brutal trail of devastation in its wake – including the near-annihilation of the legendary Knight Paladin Ever-Stalwart on Tellerax Prime. The Imperial Knight Red Might heads for the Nachmund system with a single goal in mind – hunt down his fallen brother and silence the lunatic dirge of the Litany of Destruction, or die trying!
Put yourself at the controls of a rampaging Renegade Knight – or the valiant Imperial avenger – in this boxed game containing everything you need to pit 2 towering Imperial Knights against each other in single combat. Included in the box:
- 2 Imperial Knight kits, with 1 Knight Warden upgrade frame: with these you can build the Red Might and the Litany of Destruction, with weapon options including gatling cannon, heavy flamer, heavy stubber, reaper chainsword, battle cannon, thunderstrike gauntlet thermal cannon, and ion shield, along with plenty of options for customising the faceplates and armour;
- A Sector Mechanicus Galvanic Magnavent: a scenery piece for the Knights to battle over, made up of 4 frames of plastic components – one featuring the central silo and chimneys, one filled with walkways, one filled with floors and details and one featuring the legs to hold the structure aloft;
- a 24-page softback book containing the tragic tale of the Living Litany and its fall to Chaos, the Imperium’s attempts to stem the tide of carnage it embarked upon and their dispatching of the Red Might from House Taranis;
- Rules for playing Imperial Knights: Renegade, featuring 6 missions;
- Colour schemes for 4 Questor Imperialis houses, 3 Questor Mechanicus houses, and 4 Freeblades;
- Rules for using Knights in games of Warhammer 40,000, including datasheets for a Knight Paladin, Knight Errant, Knight Gallant, Knight Warden, Knight Crusader, and Knight Renegade;
- 2 reference sheets, 1 each for the Red Might and the Litany of Destruction, featuring weapon summaries, damage tables and a reference grid for tracking damage taken;
- 2 6-sided dice and a transfer sheet for each Knight.
Would this be legal: buying a guard battery for the CP but then leaving them in the box? The reason why I ask this is, for the semi-competitive games that I play I'm not really interested in fielding these dudes as they ruin my idea of a Knight Lance. I want just the knights, and the CP - and 170 odd points is a nice way to gain just that.
Bit early on the UK site though, the NZ site only has that one up as well as of typing, still waiting on the rest to pop up.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gryphonne wrote: Would this be legal: buying a guard battery for the CP but then leaving them in the box? The reason why I ask this is, for the semi-competitive games that I play I'm not really interested in fielding these dudes as they ruin my idea of a Knight Lance. I want just the knights, and the CP - and 170 odd points is a nice way to gain just that.
Gryphonne wrote: Would this be legal: buying a guard battery for the CP but then leaving them in the box? The reason why I ask this is, for the semi-competitive games that I play I'm not really interested in fielding these dudes as they ruin my idea of a Knight Lance. I want just the knights, and the CP - and 170 odd points is a nice way to gain just that.
It's not legal for a tournament but as long as your list is ~180 points below the max for your game your friends might be cool with it. Ask them!
Gryphonne wrote: Would this be legal: buying a guard battery for the CP but then leaving them in the box? The reason why I ask this is, for the semi-competitive games that I play I'm not really interested in fielding these dudes as they ruin my idea of a Knight Lance. I want just the knights, and the CP - and 170 odd points is a nice way to gain just that.
Haha good idea, I would do that too.
Although you'll be glad you have some infantry when your opponent puts all of their objective markers on the second floor of ruins where the Knights can't reach, or to just fill up your back field to prevent deepstrikers.
Because each min guard battalion is 180pts, absolute minimum.
Nowhere near 1100 for 3 - 2 yes, but not 3.
Extremely surprised at the £120 price tag. That is a £50 discount on 2 standalone Knights, without including the terrain piece! As the terrain is priced in at £45, it's a massive £95 discount. Seriously considering getting a set myself now for the future, as i'm still not 100% sold on the rules rumours.
Gryphonne wrote: Would this be legal: buying a guard battery for the CP but then leaving them in the box? The reason why I ask this is, for the semi-competitive games that I play I'm not really interested in fielding these dudes as they ruin my idea of a Knight Lance. I want just the knights, and the CP - and 170 odd points is a nice way to gain just that.
It's not legal for a tournament but as long as your list is ~180 points below the max for your game your friends might be cool with it. Ask them!
why not? Bring the detachment and declare it in reserve..... then never bring them out..... watch the confusion on your opponents face ... ? ... profit
Gryphonne wrote: Would this be legal: buying a guard battery for the CP but then leaving them in the box? The reason why I ask this is, for the semi-competitive games that I play I'm not really interested in fielding these dudes as they ruin my idea of a Knight Lance. I want just the knights, and the CP - and 170 odd points is a nice way to gain just that.
It's not legal for a tournament but as long as your list is ~180 points below the max for your game your friends might be cool with it. Ask them!
why not? Bring the detachment and declare it in reserve..... then never bring them out..... watch the confusion on your opponents face ... ? ... profit
To do this, you'd have to use Elysians or Scions - otherwise you wouldn't be able to "deploy" the guard battalions.
Gryphonne wrote: Would this be legal: buying a guard battery for the CP but then leaving them in the box? The reason why I ask this is, for the semi-competitive games that I play I'm not really interested in fielding these dudes as they ruin my idea of a Knight Lance. I want just the knights, and the CP - and 170 odd points is a nice way to gain just that.
It's not legal for a tournament but as long as your list is ~180 points below the max for your game your friends might be cool with it. Ask them!
why not? Bring the detachment and declare it in reserve..... then never bring them out..... watch the confusion on your opponents face ... ? ... profit
To do this, you'd have to use Elysians or Scions - otherwise you wouldn't be able to "deploy" the guard battalions.
you can still bring them on through normal reserves
Cephalobeard wrote: So do we know whether or not a auxiliary super heavy Detachment will confer the character bonus?
I'm not too keen on having to run three knights just to make one of them a character.
NZ preorders just went up and
"...Command Benefit of each IK Super-heavy Detachment is changed None unless it contains any combinations of at least three QUESTORIS CLASS or DOMINUS CLASS"
Okay, so it looks like you can make a character even if you have a bunch of Armigers, which is good. Which means you can make them a Warlord and give them Relics. So at least that rumor was bunk.
casvalremdeikun wrote: Okay, so it looks like you can make a character even if you have a bunch of Armigers, which is good. Which means you can make them a Warlord and give them Relics. So at least that rumor was bunk.
and guard battalions are cheap, and I’m already running one
Cephalobeard wrote: So do we know whether or not a auxiliary super heavy Detachment will confer the character bonus?
I'm not too keen on having to run three knights just to make one of them a character.
NZ preorders just went up and
"...Command Benefit of each IK Super-heavy Detachment is changed None unless it contains any combinations of at least three QUESTORIS CLASS or DOMINUS CLASS"
So does 2 Questoris class and one Dominus give you CP or is that also out of the question?? This is already the dumbest restriction ever, GW really hates elite armies.
Cephalobeard wrote: So do we know whether or not a auxiliary super heavy Detachment will confer the character bonus?
I'm not too keen on having to run three knights just to make one of them a character.
NZ preorders just went up and
"...Command Benefit of each IK Super-heavy Detachment is changed None unless it contains any combinations of at least three QUESTORIS CLASS or DOMINUS CLASS"
By the throne, I skipped “any combinations.” I was gonna be right pissed if I couldn’t take a Dominus class and two regular Knights and not get the benefits.
What's hilarious is that FW knights don't have either of those keywords. So over half of all existing Knight units can't generate CP for a Knight army.
xttz wrote: What's hilarious is that FW knights don't have either of those keywords. So over half of all existing Knight units can't generate CP for a Knight army.
It's like GW don't want our money.
And the Knights were supposed to be in a certain book.
xttz wrote: What's hilarious is that FW knights don't have either of those keywords. So over half of all existing Knight units can't generate CP for a Knight army.
It's like GW don't want our money.
Gw said on stream today there would be an errata for the FW knight types to be able to qualify for the Knight lance benefit
The NZ preorders are up and if the armiger chassis doesn't help to give CP in a SHD then the "Imperial knight lance" bundle the sell on the site is really stupidly named.. I mean it would still give you the character keyword I guess but it still seems very confusing
PiñaColada wrote: The NZ preorders are up and if the armiger chassis doesn't help to give CP in a SHD then the "Imperial knight lance" bundle the sell on the site is really stupidly named.. I mean it would still give you the character keyword I guess but it still seems very confusing
Okay so both the Facebook page and the stream earlier had guys saying you -can- take an all freeblade detachment but “they might not work well together”.
Anyhow what they were avoiding saying there is that you can only take traits for one freeblade per detachment. That said, the freeblade doesn’t count against your household trait.
Well, the more I think about it, the less I want the Valiant. It is a cool concept, but it will be way too easy to ignore. That Harpoon probably won't ever actually do anything. The Castellan, while not great, seems more suited for actually getting some work done.
casvalremdeikun wrote: Well, the more I think about it, the less I want the Valiant. It is a cool concept, but it will be way too easy to ignore. That Harpoon probably won't ever actually do anything. The Castellan, while not great, seems more suited for actually getting some work done.
casvalremdeikun wrote: Well, the more I think about it, the less I want the Valiant. It is a cool concept, but it will be way too easy to ignore. That Harpoon probably won't ever actually do anything. The Castellan, while not great, seems more suited for actually getting some work done.
I don't know, the Harpoon re-rolls to hit (because why wouldn't you be shooting at a vehicle/monster), wounds a 2+ (use a command point for that pesky 1) and does 10+d3 wounds; that would actually be pretty good for deleting small-medium sized tanks and transports, could be very effective against those DE lists that spam Raiders, SM parking lot lists or Imperial Guard tank lines. The only downside is the poor range but then you have Knight houses, relics and warlords traits that can compensate.
Had to skip over to the second review video, but I -finally- found the secondary option for the reaper chain cleaver on Armigers: S user, AP -2, 1 damage, two attacks per attack on profile.
Not bad: If it was a feet attack it’d be amazing for carrying over to the other one, but take what you can get.
I’d say that Warglaives went from distinctly underpowered to distinctly overpowered. Not game-breakingly so, but cheaper than their actual worth.
Helverins are okay. A higher rate of fire rather than 3 damage would have been better given the importance of anti-horde and Warglaives already covering vehicle work. Compared to a similarly equipped dreadnought, they’re less accurate and more vulnerable to combat, but do higher damage per shot and are hypermobile. (Relatively unimportant on low terrain boards, great in a dense cityscape).
I’d actually be slightly tempted to stick a melta on a Helverin just to make more complete use of their high movement rate. Depends on how many spare points are left over, I guess.
casvalremdeikun wrote: Well, the more I think about it, the less I want the Valiant. It is a cool concept, but it will be way too easy to ignore. That Harpoon probably won't ever actually do anything. The Castellan, while not great, seems more suited for actually getting some work done.
No stop it rule of cool
You're right. What was I thinking?!
mrhappyface wrote:
casvalremdeikun wrote: Well, the more I think about it, the less I want the Valiant. It is a cool concept, but it will be way too easy to ignore. That Harpoon probably won't ever actually do anything. The Castellan, while not great, seems more suited for actually getting some work done.
I don't know, the Harpoon re-rolls to hit (because why wouldn't you be shooting at a vehicle/monster), wounds a 2+ (use a command point for that pesky 1) and does 10+d3 wounds; that would actually be pretty good for deleting small-medium sized tanks and transports, could be very effective against those DE lists that spam Raiders, SM parking lot lists or Imperial Guard tank lines. The only downside is the poor range but then you have Knight houses, relics and warlords traits that can compensate.
Yeah, I just don't like the short effective range. But the ability to delete a vehicle is cool. It just sucks about the Invulnerable Saves. And Necron vehicles are immune outright.
And he’s the only one with the escape hatch. At least we get the laser torch arm and it looks like some knights will have the multi laser.
I’m still confused over the Knight lance and how that all will work with it’s character interaction and CP generation. I’m sure it will be clear before long.
Now this sounds like fun, and a decent reason to take the gauntlet instead of just guns.
Smashy Then Tossy Fist was already reason enough. Now it is just downright amazing. I am going to be using the relic Thunderstrike on my Warden for sure(+2 DMG and no penalty to hit? SIGN ME UP!).
Colour me very surprised that they cut a new sprue of existing parts to make the terrain piece. That makes it technically not a kitbash.
Anyway, new Knights are awesome. Surprised the Amigas aren't a combo-kit, but I guess they had to have something to release next week alongside the special character.
xttz wrote: What's hilarious is that FW knights don't have either of those keywords. So over half of all existing Knight units can't generate CP for a Knight army.
It's like GW don't want our money.
More like it's that their rules were written before these ones, and will be FAQ'd at a later date.
Regional pricing continues to be crazy. Here in Japan the renegades box, which contains two Knights and a big piece of scenery is cheaper than a single knight Castellan.
So is Knight Lance a new detachment, or does it replace Superheavy? Can you still do Knight+Armigers for a superheavy and get command points, but not get character?
Drudge Dreadnought wrote: So is Knight Lance a new detachment, or does it replace Superheavy? Can you still do Knight+Armigers for a superheavy and get command points, but not get character?
I would imagine it will be along the lines of "If you take a superheavy detachment of knights, none of them are made into a character and none can be your warlord."
Someone posted an image of the rule a couple pages back. It literally says if you don't have 3 big knights in your super heavy detachment you get zero CP for that detachment. Its an IK army rule so it wouldn't cover other armies.
So they implemented strategy to allow knights to even attack people on higher terrain. At least something but having to spend cp to do what should be possible normally
If a knight can reach out and touch a guy...or if that guy is level with the knight's melee weapon...it should be allowed to him them. I do like that a knight cannot stomp people on the second floor or up though. I don't think this should need to be a stratagem.
tneva82 wrote: So they implemented strategy to allow knights to even attack people on higher terrain. At least something but having to spend cp to do what should be possible normally
Honestly seeing that strat really lowered my opinion of GWs rules writers (as if it could go lower, right?) They show that they know this is an issue, but instead of actually fixing the rules, they give a strat that will barely work (units will often be on multiple floors), only works for one round, AND you have to pay for. And then it leaves no fix for all the other units that have this same problem. And this suggests that now they won't ever properly fix it.
It's a totally maddening level of contempt for the player base.
I think my local game store is just going to implement common sense for it or the cylinder thing instead and this stratagem will never see the light of day.
mmzero252 wrote: I think my local game store is just going to implement common sense for it or the cylinder thing instead and this stratagem will never see the light of day.
Already done here
Though i do like no stomping upper floor. That makes sense and gives more purpose for dedicated cc weapons
So the dirty traitors are still the only ones who can take double gats?
The Dominus sprue layout with the carapace and parts of the torso with the weapons is interesting. Potential for some very different looks if/when GW make more variants.
mmzero252 wrote: I think my local game store is just going to implement common sense for it or the cylinder thing instead and this stratagem will never see the light of day.
Already done here
Though i do like no stomping upper floor. That makes sense and gives more purpose for dedicated cc weapons
That's more in line with what I meant about the common sense part. Like a cylinder is great but I do like the way the stratagem is worded. "Within 2" and 6" up, but stomps automatically miss things not on the ground floor." - This all seems like the way it should just function.Adapt that to all Lords of War that have arms or melee weapons that could realistically reach as a standard rule. Also probably Riptides, Stormsurges, G/Morkanauts, and Wraithknights. Dreadnaughts and the like are just too short.
I fully understand taking away the ability for a monster to start climbing a building to fight, but that shouldn't be allowed to hinder something with enough reach from being able to get at people in that building.
changemod wrote: Okay so both the Facebook page and the stream earlier had guys saying you -can- take an all freeblade detachment but “they might not work well together”.
Anyhow what they were avoiding saying there is that you can only take traits for one freeblade per detachment. That said, the freeblade doesn’t count against your household trait.
Wat.
Guess im just picking a household for my Freeblades then...
Btw seems the armiger no cp is specific for knight lance detachment. Wonder if that replaces superheavy detachment or could you take armigers in normal sh det for cp and what the downsides would be?
Maybe the Knight Lance is worth more CPs? That or maybe as I mentioned some posts back the Knights won't be able to get a character out of a Super Heavy Detachment anymore. I'm sure there's some convoluted reasoning behind adding a new detachment for the same purpose.
Knight Lances If your army is Battle-forged, select one model in each IMPERIAL KNIGHTS Super-heavy Detachment in your army. Each model you selected gains the CHARACTER keyword. However, the Command Benefit of each Imperial Knights Super-heavy Detachment is changed to 'None' unless it contains any combination of at least three QUESTORIS CLASS and/or DOMINUS CLASS units.
Super heavy detachment is just the one in the rulebook, no? So if its an Imperial Knight one you get no cps unless you have at least 3 big guys per detachment.
Seeing some of the nuts strategems I can see why they were so hesitant to allow cp, I think they forgot guard exists though. The price reductions to things like rfbc seem to not be necessary now precisely because they beefed up things with traits strats and relics
Knight Lances If your army is Battle-forged, select one model in each IMPERIAL KNIGHTS Super-heavy Detachment in your army. Each model you selected gains the CHARACTER keyword. However, the Command Benefit of each Imperial Knights Super-heavy Detachment is changed to 'None' unless it contains any combination of at least three QUESTORIS CLASS and/or DOMINUS CLASS units.
Welp, there goes about half their potential sales, including mine. Shooting themselves in the foot with a knight sized harpoon launcher for 10 damage + 1d3 mortal wounds. I cannot fathom how the same team that figured out cool stuff like thunderstrike gauntlets tossing stuff around could also put this in. The viability of knights in the meta is already borderline, and their strats expensive. This is just too much of a middle finger to the players. Imagine being the guy who made those cool sculpts, only to see them gather dust on the shelves because they let an idiot write the rules.
Crazyterran wrote: Super heavy detachment is just the one in the rulebook, no? So if its an Imperial Knight one you get no cps unless you have at least 3 big guys per detachment.
Its not a new detachment,
It's basically a special rule for knights. Take 3 big knights, one in each super heavy detachment and they all become characters but you get no command points. Somehow take 3 big knights in one Super Heavy and 1 plus some armigers in another and you get +3 command points and two of those knights are characters.
So...yeah pretty crap.Why give us rules to select multiple knights as characters but deny all command points for a detachment unless we use 3 big knights in it? It's literally set up for three detachments with a big knight in each followed by armigers.
Crazyterran wrote: Super heavy detachment is just the one in the rulebook, no? So if its an Imperial Knight one you get no cps unless you have at least 3 big guys per detachment.
Its not a new detachment,
It's basically a special rule for knights. Take 3 big knights, one in each super heavy detachment and they all become characters but you get no command points. Somehow take 3 big knights in one Super Heavy and 1 plus some armigers in another and you get +3 command points and two of those knights are characters.
So...yeah pretty crap.Why give us rules to select multiple knights as characters but deny all command points for a detachment unless we use 3 big knights in it? It's literally set up for three detachments with a big knight in each followed by armigers.
If you can't see why they want you to group your armigers in one detachment and big knights in the other to benefit from character and warlord traits then you're a muppet.
In another universe this rule wasn't inserted and this same thread is full of the same muppets saying "OMG its so OP you can take 3 knight lances and gave 3 character knights GW you are idiots"
You can still take a superheavy detachment with 1 knight and 2 armigers and get CP but your knight doesn't become a character.
Okay, but I’m frankly not going to build a full household of large knights when I can do so in Adeptus Titanicus for the cost of a few terminator boxes. I briefly considered a harpoon knight, but honestly it’s body isn’t a pretty design and it’s a big purchase for a model I won’t field much.
Whereas I have four Warglaives from forgebane kits and am planning on at least one helverin box.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Silentz wrote: If you can't see why they want you to group your armigers in one detachment and big knights in the other to benefit from character and warlord traits then you're a muppet.
In another universe this rule wasn't inserted and this same thread is full of the same muppets saying "OMG its so OP you can take 3 knight lances and gave 3 character knights GW you are idiots"
You can still take a superheavy detachment with 1 knight and 2 armigers and get CP but your knight doesn't become a character.
You can take three Armigers and one of those Armigers will become a character and gain access to warlord traits.
You just don’t get command points, when significantly more overpowered horde armies get handed them out like candy.
Silentz wrote: If you can't see why they want you to group your armigers in one detachment and big knights in the other to benefit from character and warlord traits then you're a muppet.
In another universe this rule wasn't inserted and this same thread is full of the same muppets saying "OMG its so OP you can take 3 knight lances and gave 3 character knights GW you are idiots"
You can still take a superheavy detachment with 1 knight and 2 armigers and get CP but your knight doesn't become a character.
I uh..think you may want to re-read what it said. Nothing you said lines up at all.
"Knight Lances
If your army is Battle-forged, select one model in each IMPERIAL KNIGHTS Super-heavy Detachment in your army. Each model you selected gains the CHARACTER keyword. However, the Command Benefit of each Imperial Knights Super-heavy Detachment is changed to 'None' unless it contains any combination of at least three QUESTORIS CLASS and/or DOMINUS CLASS units."
You get 1 character per super heavy detachment. You get no command points unless the detachment contains at least 3 big knights. So yeah, you can have 3 super heavy detachments with only 1 big knight and all the rest are full of armigers, but that means you get 1 character knight and 2 character armigers and no command points.
You can take three Armigers and one of those Armigers will become a character and gain access to warlord traits.
You just don’t get command points, when significantly more overpowered horde armies get handed them out like candy.
Nope don't think so. That's just a standard super heavy detachment and WILL give CPs.
Your super heavy detachment is only a Knight Lance if it contains at least 3 full size knights. Otherwise it's just the plain old regular superheavy detachment
You can take three Armigers and one of those Armigers will become a character and gain access to warlord traits.
You just don’t get command points, when significantly more overpowered horde armies get handed them out like candy.
Nope don't think so. That's just a standard super heavy detachment and WILL give CPs.
Your super heavy detachment is only a Knight Lance if it contains at least 3 full size knights. Otherwise it's just the plain old regular superheavy detachment
It’s pretty explicit: Any imperial knights superheavy detachment can nominate one knight to be a character. Command benefits of the detachment are lost unless three of them aren’t Armigers.
I'll go read it all again but I am reading it as a choice to allow you to get the bonuses of character rules and warlord traits, rather than a mandatory change...
Silentz wrote: If you can't see why they want you to group your armigers in one detachment and big knights in the other to benefit from character and warlord traits then you're a muppet.
In another universe this rule wasn't inserted and this same thread is full of the same muppets saying "OMG its so OP you can take 3 knight lances and gave 3 character knights GW you are idiots"
You can still take a superheavy detachment with 1 knight and 2 armigers and get CP but your knight doesn't become a character.
Except from pic above knight lance isn't optional so 3 armigers, no cp
Also if you resort to name calling you admit your arqument is worthless.
Silentz wrote: Also if you resort to name calling you admit your arqument is worthless.
Let’s be real: He’s wrong because the substance of his argument is wrong. If you resort to name calling, you resort to name calling. Nothing more, nothing less.
Silentz wrote: Hm. Maybe so. Apologies for my own stupididty. I did not think that was mandatory but an option to reward you for taking "proper" knight detachments.
So... can you fit this in 2000:
Guard Battalion 250pts
IK superheavy knight lance -
1 dominus class knight 650
2 questoris knights 480 each
2 armiger helliger(?) 200 each
points very approximate but that totals 1800 and would have... i think 3+5+3=11 CPs?
Edit: BAD MATHS! Probably cant afford the armigers.
Questoris knights are apparently down to 285 points base. Some of the weapons got reductions as well. The Armigers are roughly 180 points for the better options too.
These do not include carapace weapons! Sorry for the formatting, also note, might have some mistakes
Warden 285 + (75 + 17) + 30 + 4 = 411
Errant 285 + 76 + 30 + 4 = 395
Gallant 285(?) + 30 + 35 + 4 = 354
Warglaive 160 + 4 (includes Thermal Spear and Chaincleaver)
Helverin 170 + 4 (includes Armiger Autocannon)
Paladin 285 + (100 + 4) + 30 + 4 = 423
Crusader 285 + (75 + 17) + (100 + 4) + 4 = 485
Canis Rex 450 (Includes all wargear)
Valiant He didn't mention the base cost, includes Metla and 2 primary weapons for free + weapon options on 3 carapace hardpoints
Castellan He didn't mention the base cost, includes Metla and 2 primary weapons for free + weapon options on 3 carapace hardpoints
Preceptor 385 (Includes Las Impulsor) + 30 + 4 = 419
Also, Gallant is now 5 attacks and WS2+.
Thermal Cannon 76
Stormspear 45
Reaper chainsword 30
Gauntlet 35
Avenger Gatling 75
Heavy Flamer 17
Rapid Fire BC 100
Stubber 4
Shieldbreaker Missile 12
Siegebreaker Cannon 35
Thanks for the write up! He did mention the Castellan base cost though..(I think I've heard that the Valiant is base cost 500 but I might be making that up)
Castellan 510
So depending on 2 sets of missiles and one siegebreaker it's 593 points
Or two siegebreaker hardpoints and one set of missiles it's 604 points
Thanks for the write up! He did mention the Castellan base cost though..(I think I've heard that the Valiant is base cost 500 but I might be making that up)
Castellan 510
So depending on 2 sets of missiles and one siegebreaker it's 593 points
Or two siegebreaker hardpoints and one set of missiles it's 604 points
Ah, might have missed that Also, not entirely sure whether the Shieldbreakers are per battery or per physical missile.
Thanks for the write up! He did mention the Castellan base cost though..(I think I've heard that the Valiant is base cost 500 but I might be making that up)
Castellan 510
So depending on 2 sets of missiles and one siegebreaker it's 593 points
Or two siegebreaker hardpoints and one set of missiles it's 604 points
Ah, might have missed that Also, not entirely sure whether the Shieldbreakers are per battery or per physical missile.
I assume per missile since otherwise they're the same cost as a hunter-killer but easily more effective against almost all targets. S10 vs S8, AP-4 vs AP-2 and no invulnerable saves.
If it was just a special rule so that an imperial knight can’t be a character unless it’s in a detachment of 3 knights or take sthe exception warlord strat, or is a unique character that would be completely fine even if it limits relics.
However it’s either worded poorly or just complete junk because most people are reading it as every superheavy detachment With any knights receives no CP unless you take 3 larger knights in any combination.
gungo wrote: If it was just a special rule so that an imperial knight can’t be a character unless it’s in a detachment of 3 knights or take sthe exception warlord strat, or is a unique character that would be completely fine even if it limits relics.
However it’s either worded poorly or just complete junk because most people are reading it as every superheavy detachment With any knights receives no CP unless you take 3 larger knights in any combination.
That's what it says.
You can also take a detachment that doesn't have three questor/dominus knights (i.e. armigers mixed in) and still get a character.
Not quite as many points down on my Warden as I had hoped, but I might be able to squeeze two big Knights into my Ad Mech list instead of one Knight and two Armigers.
Welp, there goes about half their potential sales, including mine. Shooting themselves in the foot with a knight sized harpoon launcher for 10 damage + 1d3 mortal wounds. I cannot fathom how the same team that figured out cool stuff like thunderstrike gauntlets tossing stuff around could also put this in. The viability of knights in the meta is already borderline, and their strats expensive. This is just too much of a middle finger to the players. Imagine being the guy who made those cool sculpts, only to see them gather dust on the shelves because they let an idiot write the rules.
1. it was done for balance purposes.
2. it's cute how people think their individual $$$ counts for much, meanwhile GW continues to make record profits.
people will still rush out and buy these models regardless what a vocal minority think. they are doing it like so, because the controversy is less this way.
If CP is so important then just pick a keyword other than Imperial Knights for the detachment and you can have your armigers and your CP, you just don't get a character (and probably stratagems).
All this rule does is require you to have three of questor/dominus if you want CPand a character.
The price for the Armiger patterns is lovely. 220+ points just wasn't worth it. But sub 200 is perfect. The Helverin Autocannons are 2D3 each with I think AP-1 or 2 and 3 damage I think. I'm totally building my second Armiger with those guns.
anyname121 wrote: The price for the Armiger patterns is lovely. 220+ points just wasn't worth it. But sub 200 is perfect. The Helverin Autocannons are 2D3 each with I think AP-1 or 2 and 3 damage I think. I'm totally building my second Armiger with those guns.
Build Helverins in a Detachment with a Knight Warden rocking a Heavy Stubber, give the whole Detachment Ironhail Heavy Stubbers stratagem for AP-1 Heavy Stubbers in addition to their other stuff for some fun at rooting out light infantry.
I reckon it might be good to go with a valiant and a couple of questoris knights, for ~14-500 points. That leaves enough for a battalion of your choice, though of course there’s a strong case for IG. If you wanted you could then just about add in another knight, some armigers or maybe a spearhead of basilisks. Loads of options, basically.
I think that a vanguard of assassins could be a really useful option. Say a vindicareand a couple of Culexus. A vindicare combined with a couple of missiles off a Dominus would make characters’ lives brief and not much fun.
I actually think the points values look about right. There doesn’t seem to be an obviously “right” choice of knight. The avenger probably needed its price cut, because of its heavy flamer “tax”, though now I think it feels like clearly the best of the questoris gun options. The RFBC has always been kind of the best option, so I think the price is correct. The errant is probably the weakest of the knights, due to the prevalence of invulnerable saves.
I’m rethinking gallants. One of these guys with the +1A warlord trait is an absolute beast, for not too many points. Give him the relic fist, or maybe just something to make him live longer, and he’ll make a mess.
Not too sure about the relic gauntlet still. I’m not sure there are many situations in which it’s needed. Few things have enough wounds for it to make a difference, though that might need testing. Maybe it’s how you make sure that a PBC dies properly, rather than pass a couple of invulnerable saves and live.
So maybe going Valiant, Crusader, Gallant is the best option. The galant can zerg ahead, rushing towards the biggest threat and making itself a target. The valiant and crusader should then live long enough do do real damage. That should cost about 1450, leaving you with plenty of options for other stuff.
Points have gone down radically. You used to be able to field 4 knights at 2k. Now you can have 5, or 4 and a bunch of other stuff.
I'm feeling a Knight Lancer with 2-4 Armiger Warglaives as House Terryn.
WT for a 4++ and relic for 2+ armor save on the Lancer.
Ally either BA and Guard, or just a Guard Brigade.
Outflank some Warglaives, if possible, move, advance and charge the Lancer and almost guarantee a t1 charge every turn, double fight to just obliterate a few things.
I’m not overly worried by a dearth of Command Points.
Yes, they’re useful for picking off characters and boosting your shield - but not having that many of them seems to be the price for fielding an army which largely scoffs at small arms fire.
2. it's cute how people think their individual $$$ counts for much, meanwhile GW continues to make record profits.
people will still rush out and buy these models regardless what a vocal minority think. they are doing it like so, because the controversy is less this way.
it's not gonna limit any significant sales.
How cute some people still think gw can or even care about balance as it's been repeatedly shown to be false.
I personally think that knights having few CP would be a fair drawback but the problem is that the rule only really punishes pure knight lists. Anyone willing to soup is just going to add 180 points of guard and most of those issues are mitigated.
At the very least I think that 3 big knights should give 5 cp, the cheapest way you can get that is 1062 points (three gallants with no extra equipment) so it's not like you could fit two of those detachments at 2k/1750 points anyways.
PiñaColada wrote: I personally think that knights having few CP would be a fair drawback but the problem is that the rule only really punishes pure knight lists. Anyone willing to soup is just going to add 180 points of guard and most of those issues are mitigated.
At the very least I think that 3 big knights should give 5 cp, the cheapest way you can get that is 1062 points (three gallants with no extra equipment) so it's not like you could fit two of those detachments at 2k/1750 points anyways.
Honestly, the only thing getting punished is people running Armigers as cheap ways to fill out the Superheavy Detachment.
PiñaColada wrote: I personally think that knights having few CP would be a fair drawback but the problem is that the rule only really punishes pure knight lists. Anyone willing to soup is just going to add 180 points of guard and most of those issues are mitigated.
At the very least I think that 3 big knights should give 5 cp, the cheapest way you can get that is 1062 points (three gallants with no extra equipment) so it's not like you could fit two of those detachments at 2k/1750 points anyways.
Honestly, the only thing getting punished is people running Armigers as cheap ways to fill out the Superheavy Detachment.
Look, I'm not too upset about it, but it's ridiculous to say that it was an unrealistic expactation considering how armigers role on the battlefield was framed around their release.
So it’s looking like FW Castigator knights don’t help fill out the Knight Lance requirements then? If so that is ridiculously lame. My guess is FW would have to put out a FAQ saying they count towards it.
dan2026 wrote: I think it's probably fair that Armigers don't give CP.
It's wouldn't be fair if you could spam a ton of them for super cheap Lord of War detachments.
That makes no sense though.
522pts for 3CP from small giant robots, or
180pts for 5CP from guardsmen
I could understand if the rule said 1 big knight per detachment, but 3 is nuts when they specifically just introduced a model to make list building more granular.
casvalremdeikun wrote: Is it wrong that I want a Crusader with a Las Impulsor and Avenger Gatling Cannon?
Yes, as from what I can see the impulsor is a straight downgrade vs a RFBC or thermal cannon. I guess you could make the argument that it’s good to have the option of two modes, but not when the price for doing so is such a drop in power.
That said, if it’s cheap-ish and you’re running armigers it’s not an awful knight. I think it’s a bad main weapon, but it does look good, and the buffs could even out the loss of effectiveness.
I don't play knights, but I do find the CP restriction odd and a bit arbitrary, but I "may" understand it. I think it may be based around the general strength of Knights (perhaps each stratagem is quite good because it benefits such a strong unit?). However, the idea of "cheap" Super Heavy Detachments seems a bit odd. The Armigers, even three of them is still more cost than any of the "cheap" battalions run by other armies. At most you would have farmed an additional 12 CPs if you went for what, 12 armigers in a 2000 point list or so? It's not akin to the 20+ that some Guard versions can make up.
Just seems a bit odd, made moreso by the recent bump in CPs for other armies.
PiñaColada wrote: I personally think that knights having few CP would be a fair drawback but the problem is that the rule only really punishes pure knight lists. Anyone willing to soup is just going to add 180 points of guard and most of those issues are mitigated.
At the very least I think that 3 big knights should give 5 cp, the cheapest way you can get that is 1062 points (three gallants with no extra equipment) so it's not like you could fit two of those detachments at 2k/1750 points anyways.
Honestly, the only thing getting punished is people running Armigers as cheap ways to fill out the Superheavy Detachment.
Look, I'm not too upset about it, but it's ridiculous to say that it was an unrealistic expactation considering how armigers role on the battlefield was framed around their release.
I think the relevant point is FILLING OUT a SHD.
A Full SHD has 5 slots, so 3 big knights & then up to 6 Armigers for the other 2 slots.
casvalremdeikun wrote: Is it wrong that I want a Crusader with a Las Impulsor and Avenger Gatling Cannon?
Yes, as from what I can see the impulsor is a straight downgrade vs a RFBC or thermal cannon. I guess you could make the argument that it’s good to have the option of two modes, but not when the price for doing so is such a drop in power.
That said, if it’s cheap-ish and you’re running armigers it’s not an awful knight. I think it’s a bad main weapon, but it does look good, and the buffs could even out the loss of effectiveness.
This, like the Valiant is more of a rule cool. It looks like it is best served hanging out with that max-shot fortification.
I think the relevant point is FILLING OUT a SHD.
A Full SHD has 5 slots, so 3 big knights & then up to 6 Armigers for the other 2 slots.
I really don't think that's the point of the sentence since that doesn't affect ones ability to net 3cp at all, thus negating the other half of that sentence entirely. Point is, even if that was their intention it was either written poorly or in a deliberately confusing way to garner more sales. Neither of those options are all that great.
I feel as though the Knight lance is a knee jerk reaction to people farming CP with multiple cheap detatchments like the 180pt guard detachment that gives 5cp. The problem is it screws over a pure knight list which with the rule of 3 would have a maximum of 2 detachments under 2000pts. I believe they should change the knight lance to a entirely separate detachment than the superheavy detachment and thats how you get your free character upgrade, otherwise you have to use the strat.
The point of the knight lance rule is to stop you getting 3cp for bringing 2 armigers. Armigers aren’t cp batteries. That’s fine.
So you can take a knight on his own as an auxiliary detachment. 0cp and not a character.
Add a couple of armigers and you still don’t get 0 cps but you can make a knight a character.
Add two proper knights and you get your cps.
The IG battalion is not fine. That doesn’t mean other stuff should be broken to keep up. And you can get 3 knights for ~1200pts, so plenty of room for other stuff, including a battalion of anything but custodes if you want.
Mandragola wrote: The point of the knight lance rule is to stop you getting 3cp for bringing 2 armigers. Armigers aren’t cp batteries. That’s fine.
So you can take a knight on his own as an auxiliary detachment. 0cp and not a character.
Add a couple of armigers and you still don’t get 0 cps but you can make a knight a character.
Add two proper knights and you get your cps.
The IG battalion is not fine. That doesn’t mean other stuff should be broken to keep up. And you can get 3 knights for ~1200pts, so plenty of room for other stuff, including a battalion of anything but custodes if you want.
You’re calling a hypothetical 3CP for the same points range guard can farm 15 “keeping up”?
Danit wrote: I feel as though the Knight lance is a knee jerk reaction to people farming CP with multiple cheap detatchments like the 180pt guard detachment that gives 5cp. The problem is it screws over a pure knight list which with the rule of 3 would have a maximum of 2 detachments under 2000pts. I believe they should change the knight lance to a entirely separate detachment than the superheavy detachment and thats how you get your free character upgrade, otherwise you have to use the strat.
uh.... exactly how PURE is anyone making a knight list? i can't think of any good knight lists without at least a battalion of guard. Screens are mandatory this edition.
So, as i was playing around with ideas, i kept finding myself wanting to take 3 Knights and spend 9CP on them before the game even began due to relics (essentially to get 2 extra relics, it's going to cost you 6CP - as you need to spend 3 on the relics and 3 on making 2 Knights characters to then be able to take them...)
As a result, i'm prob going to drop my idea of 1 autocannon Armiger for a 2nd Guard Battalion.
Danit wrote: I feel as though the Knight lance is a knee jerk reaction to people farming CP with multiple cheap detatchments like the 180pt guard detachment that gives 5cp. The problem is it screws over a pure knight list which with the rule of 3 would have a maximum of 2 detachments under 2000pts. I believe they should change the knight lance to a entirely separate detachment than the superheavy detachment and thats how you get your free character upgrade, otherwise you have to use the strat.
uh.... exactly how PURE is anyone making a knight list? i can't think of any good knight lists without at least a battalion of guard. Screens are mandatory this edition.
Depends completely. Knights don't have to worry too much about screens as they can fall back and still shoot and charge without issue.
If they need a screen to protect from smites, then 1 or 2 Armigers can easily tick that box as it's a massive 24 wounds to chew through beforehand. Expensive screen, but, we also won't be seeing dozens of first turn charges either.
Mandragola wrote: The point of the knight lance rule is to stop you getting 3cp for bringing 2 armigers. Armigers aren’t cp batteries. That’s fine.
So you can take a knight on his own as an auxiliary detachment. 0cp and not a character.
Add a couple of armigers and you still don’t get 0 cps but you can make a knight a character.
Add two proper knights and you get your cps.
The IG battalion is not fine. That doesn’t mean other stuff should be broken to keep up. And you can get 3 knights for ~1200pts, so plenty of room for other stuff, including a battalion of anything but custodes if you want.
You’re calling a hypothetical 3CP for the same points range guard can farm 15 “keeping up”?
That’s exactly the opposite of what I’m saying. I’m saying that just because IG get tons of cps it doesn’t mean that everyone should. One thing being broken is not a reason to break everything.
FWIW I think there’s a decent case for using admech for your battalion, rather than IG. A couple of enginseers and 15 rangers or vanguard come to just over 200pts. You get to use the knight of the cog stratagem, which I like, and the enginseers can patch up your knights a bit. Stygies guys can infiltrate to make a nuisance of themselves.
Armigers shouldn’t really be lords of war. They are, so that they can be taken in an IK army that’s made of super-heavy detachments. But you don’t get the credit for taking 3 superheavies unless you take real superheavies.
Mandragola wrote: The point of the knight lance rule is to stop you getting 3cp for bringing 2 armigers. Armigers aren’t cp batteries. That’s fine.
So you can take a knight on his own as an auxiliary detachment. 0cp and not a character.
Add a couple of armigers and you still don’t get 0 cps but you can make a knight a character.
Add two proper knights and you get your cps.
The IG battalion is not fine. That doesn’t mean other stuff should be broken to keep up. And you can get 3 knights for ~1200pts, so plenty of room for other stuff, including a battalion of anything but custodes if you want.
You’re calling a hypothetical 3CP for the same points range guard can farm 15 “keeping up”?
That’s exactly the opposite of what I’m saying. I’m saying that just because IG get tons of cps it doesn’t mean that everyone should. One thing being broken is not a reason to break everything.
No, it’s pretty much exactly what you’re saying. You’re implying that 3CP for 540 points is broken by drawing comparison to 15CP for 540 points.
tneva82 wrote: Gee. Let's react to 180pts farms by making them mandatory.
Actually that does sound very gw like...
Those 180 pts cost how much money?
I know it is probably not all that effective, but I am looking at using a little over 500 pts of Ad Mech(primarily Rangers and a couple Techpriests) with my 3 Big Knights and filling up the rest with either a Neutron Donkeytank or an Armiger or two. Sure, the amount of Ad Mech takes another Knight out of my list, but it is two squads of Arquebus Rangers and a big squad of Arc Rifle Rangers. So they are at least useful, especially the Snipers. The crappy thing is I am not going to run Questor Mechanicus (I am actually looking at Mortan or Griffith). I suppose I could go with a Raven offshoot (which would be very fitting for my dark green color scheme I have planned).
Mandragola wrote: The point of the knight lance rule is to stop you getting 3cp for bringing 2 armigers. Armigers aren’t cp batteries. That’s fine.
So you can take a knight on his own as an auxiliary detachment. 0cp and not a character.
Add a couple of armigers and you still don’t get 0 cps but you can make a knight a character.
Add two proper knights and you get your cps.
The IG battalion is not fine. That doesn’t mean other stuff should be broken to keep up. And you can get 3 knights for ~1200pts, so plenty of room for other stuff, including a battalion of anything but custodes if you want.
You’re calling a hypothetical 3CP for the same points range guard can farm 15 “keeping up”?
That’s exactly the opposite of what I’m saying. I’m saying that just because IG get tons of cps it doesn’t mean that everyone should. One thing being broken is not a reason to break everything.
FWIW I think there’s a decent case for using admech for your battalion, rather than IG. A couple of enginseers and 15 rangers or vanguard come to just over 200pts. You get to use the knight of the cog stratagem, which I like, and the enginseers can patch up your knights a bit. Stygies guys can infiltrate to make a nuisance of themselves.
Armigers shouldn’t really be lords of war. They are, so that they can be taken in an IK army that’s made of super-heavy detachments. But you don’t get the credit for taking 3 superheavies unless you take real superheavies.
Personally, i'm leaning more towards Imperialis Knights rather than Mechanicus Knights, so Knight of the Cog won't help me out. I'm planning on running a tech-priest as well, within 1 of the Guard battalions due to it only costing 42 points. Mistake - Guard Tech-Priest won't be able to repair a non-Mechanicus Knight :(
Mandragola wrote: The point of the knight lance rule is to stop you getting 3cp for bringing 2 armigers. Armigers aren’t cp batteries. That’s fine.
So you can take a knight on his own as an auxiliary detachment. 0cp and not a character.
Add a couple of armigers and you still don’t get 0 cps but you can make a knight a character.
Add two proper knights and you get your cps.
The IG battalion is not fine. That doesn’t mean other stuff should be broken to keep up. And you can get 3 knights for ~1200pts, so plenty of room for other stuff, including a battalion of anything but custodes if you want.
Armigers are hardly broken forcp. 480pts minimum. How many armies have to pay over 1000 pts for 3 cp? Answer. Just knights.
Balance is out of whack with this. Gw just wants to force knight armies to buy ig
Armigers are hardly broken forcp. 480pts minimum. How many armies have to pay over 1000 pts for 3 cp? Answer. Just knights.
Balance is out of whack with this. Gw just wants to force knight armies to buy ig
Yeah, it's a bit weird. It'd rather have people (and Knights players in particular) use Armigers to stock up on some CP instead of the inevitable Guard Battalion. But it's not a huge deal either.
The whole CP thing is still ass-backwards IMO. It should be small, elite, low-model count armies like all Terminator Grey Knights, Imperial Knights, Deathwatch, pure Harlequins, Assassins only or whatnot, that are swimming in CP for fighting weird black-ops style battles, while filling the board with 4 or 5 point models should be the lowest command-point armies in the game, both background wise because hordes of less-trained chaff are "harder" to command and because they use numbers of bodies/guns/teeth-and-claws to win instead of being super-sneaky-strategic.
The lance restriction doesn’t solve any problems nor is there any problem for it to solve. You still need 3 units for a SH detachment and 3cp wasn’t that great anyway. I saw no list that would be a problem in anyway taking pure knights. In fact the strongest list were guard and knights together.
Personally even if they didn’t want a pure Armiger SH detachment they should have required a single knight (plus 2 armigers) in a SH detachment to grant command points.
And even this setup is still -650 points for a gallant and 2 hellingers which are the cheapest setup and would only give 6 CP. Again nothing here is a problem in any meta and it’s actually fluffy and how Knights houses are supposed to be setup.
If GW bring over the new rule for AoS-2.0 to 40k Knights might have a decent CP buffer. The one where for every 50 points you don't spend on stuff you get 1 CP. Would help balance out a bit I think.
So, when i first started watching this i wasn't sure about it, but, i stuck with it and found it really helpful as a quick breakdown, and pretty hilarious!
Armigers are hardly broken forcp. 480pts minimum. How many armies have to pay over 1000 pts for 3 cp? Answer. Just knights.
Balance is out of whack with this. Gw just wants to force knight armies to buy ig
Yeah, it's a bit weird. It'd rather have people (and Knights players in particular) use Armigers to stock up on some CP instead of the inevitable Guard Battalion. But it's not a huge deal either.
The whole CP thing is still ass-backwards IMO. It should be small, elite, low-model count armies like all Terminator Grey Knights, Imperial Knights, Deathwatch, pure Harlequins, Assassins only or whatnot, that are swimming in CP for fighting weird black-ops style battles, while filling the board with 4 or 5 point models should be the lowest command-point armies in the game, both background wise because hordes of less-trained chaff are "harder" to command and because they use numbers of bodies/guns/teeth-and-claws to win instead of being super-sneaky-strategic.
That would require rethink of strategems though as those elites tend to have most awesome and cp hungry strategems. If they had those and tons odcp and hordes would have few cp and poorer strategems it would hardly be balanced
Armigers are hardly broken forcp. 480pts minimum. How many armies have to pay over 1000 pts for 3 cp? Answer. Just knights.
Balance is out of whack with this. Gw just wants to force knight armies to buy ig
Yeah, it's a bit weird. It'd rather have people (and Knights players in particular) use Armigers to stock up on some CP instead of the inevitable Guard Battalion. But it's not a huge deal either.
The whole CP thing is still ass-backwards IMO. It should be small, elite, low-model count armies like all Terminator Grey Knights, Imperial Knights, Deathwatch, pure Harlequins, Assassins only or whatnot, that are swimming in CP for fighting weird black-ops style battles, while filling the board with 4 or 5 point models should be the lowest command-point armies in the game, both background wise because hordes of less-trained chaff are "harder" to command and because they use numbers of bodies/guns/teeth-and-claws to win instead of being super-sneaky-strategic.
I agree with this. Hordes should be unwieldy. Elites should be efficient.
Ultimately GW has decided to give you cps for taking troops and HQs. A thousand point custodes outrider detachment gives 1cp. A 540 point IG brigade gives 15. It’s a weird way to go about things, but it’s what they’ve chosen to go with - like it or not.
Not giving cps for armigers isn’t about balance. It’s about GW not thinking they deserve to count as superheavies, because they just aren’t very big. When trying to understand GW’s “thought process” you should always look for the simplest, most stupid explanation. You won’t go far wrong.
Anyway the recent previews have made me a lot happier about my existing taranis knights. A 6+++ is awesome news. I think I’ll get myself a Castellan with Cawl’s Wrath (now that is a gun) and the 4++ invulnerable trait. Not sure what I’ll have to back it up but I’ve got a few options available.
TERRYN knight lancers are going to be the real deal. Or TERRYN atropos. Assuming you run 2 battalions of chaff, you can do a 3d6 drop the lowest but still advance 2d6 advance plus 14" movement and then do a 3d6 drop the lowest charge.
PiñaColada wrote: I personally think that knights having few CP would be a fair drawback but the problem is that the rule only really punishes pure knight lists. Anyone willing to soup is just going to add 180 points of guard and most of those issues are mitigated.
At the very least I think that 3 big knights should give 5 cp, the cheapest way you can get that is 1062 points (three gallants with no extra equipment) so it's not like you could fit two of those detachments at 2k/1750 points anyways.
Honestly, the only thing getting punished is people running Armigers as cheap ways to fill out the Superheavy Detachment.
Look, I'm not too upset about it, but it's ridiculous to say that it was an unrealistic expactation considering how armigers role on the battlefield was framed around their release.
And what's happened since then, in terms of Command Points? April basically saw a huge change in the beta rules regarding CPs and things of that nature.
Wulfey wrote: TERRYN knight lancers are going to be the real deal. Or TERRYN atropos. Assuming you run 2 battalions of chaff, you can do a 3d6 drop the lowest but still advance 2d6 advance plus 14" movement and then do a 3d6 drop the lowest charge.
If you spend a CP, you can then give it the +2 advance and charge warlord trait as well!
Inquisitor Kallus wrote: Are armigers going to be available seperately? I hope so or it's pretty crappy otherwise
There's two different Armiger kits: The Helverin just went up for preorder today and is the pewpewpew version. The Warglaive, which is currently only in Forgebane, remains to be seen separately.
Wulfey wrote: TERRYN knight lancers are going to be the real deal. Or TERRYN atropos. Assuming you run 2 battalions of chaff, you can do a 3d6 drop the lowest but still advance 2d6 advance plus 14" movement and then do a 3d6 drop the lowest charge.
If you spend a CP, you can then give it the +2 advance and charge warlord trait as well!
Right, it is so savage. And the +2 inch is an aura. Just my three knights on the shelf but kitted out as gallants could be terrifying. Pour all kinds of CP on those 3, give them all a WLT and a relic, then throw them up the field and let the dice sort it out. That still leaves like 800 points of bullcrap battalions to hold the back row. BLANGELS is an obvious choice. Smash captains always do work. Even if you are low on CPs, smash captain can kill what the knights can't (nothing pops fliers like a smash captain). Running 3 icarus autocannons might actually be necessary due to the threat of eldar flyers. Then you can take a CADIAN mortar battalion to sit in the back. Let me see if I can get a tournament next week. That list sounds like a riot.
Wulfey wrote: TERRYN knight lancers are going to be the real deal. Or TERRYN atropos. Assuming you run 2 battalions of chaff, you can do a 3d6 drop the lowest but still advance 2d6 advance plus 14" movement and then do a 3d6 drop the lowest charge.
If you spend a CP, you can then give it the +2 advance and charge warlord trait as well!
Right, it is so savage. And the +2 inch is an aura. Just my three knights on the shelf but kitted out as gallants could be terrifying. Pour all kinds of CP on those 3, give them all a WLT and a relic, then throw them up the field and let the dice sort it out. That still leaves like 800 points of bullcrap battalions to hold the back row. BLANGELS is an obvious choice. Smash captains always do work. Even if you are low on CPs, smash captain can kill what the knights can't (nothing pops fliers like a smash captain). Running 3 icarus autocannons might actually be necessary due to the threat of eldar flyers. Then you can take a CADIAN mortar battalion to sit in the back. Let me see if I can get a tournament next week. That list sounds like a riot.
If you're running 3 Gallants, then i don't really see the need for the Smashcaptains. You already have 3 massive melee threats, that it'd prob be better aiming for some ranged/horde dealing options.
I'm personally starting to think Mortan Gallant with the +2" warlord trait and Helm of the Nameless Warrior relic. Essentially giving it 6 attacks on the turn it charges, with WS 2 and re-rolling 1's.
Anyone else of a mind that two turrets and one missiles is the best way to go?
I mean, the missiles are damned useful - but we can only launch one a turn. Plus, to get the most out of them, we’re looking at spending 2 CP. Now I’m far from highly experienced with 8th Ed, but I’m thinking there’s not gonna be that many characters in a given enemy army in especially rapid need of deletion. So perhaps 4 CP neeed altogether to really start breaking synergy?
Anyone else of a mind that two turrets and one missiles is the best way to go?
I mean, the missiles are damned useful - but we can only launch one a turn. Plus, to get the most out of them, we’re looking at spending 2 CP. Now I’m far from highly experienced with 8th Ed, but I’m thinking there’s not gonna be that many characters in a given enemy army in especially rapid need of deletion. So perhaps 4 CP neeed altogether to really start breaking synergy?
I am of that mindset. Especially on a Valiant. It allows them to be a ranged threat even before they are able to get in range of their main weapons.
Though I would say for an allied Knight, as a single LoW, four has a wider appeal, as you’re more likely to have the CP available to really break your opponent’s command structure?
Other than that, the turrets just seem more ubiquitous. Decent amount and potency of firepower for what are ultimately secondary weapons.
Wulfey wrote: TERRYN knight lancers are going to be the real deal. Or TERRYN atropos. Assuming you run 2 battalions of chaff, you can do a 3d6 drop the lowest but still advance 2d6 advance plus 14" movement and then do a 3d6 drop the lowest charge.
If you spend a CP, you can then give it the +2 advance and charge warlord trait as well!
Right, it is so savage. And the +2 inch is an aura. Just my three knights on the shelf but kitted out as gallants could be terrifying. Pour all kinds of CP on those 3, give them all a WLT and a relic, then throw them up the field and let the dice sort it out. That still leaves like 800 points of bullcrap battalions to hold the back row. BLANGELS is an obvious choice. Smash captains always do work. Even if you are low on CPs, smash captain can kill what the knights can't (nothing pops fliers like a smash captain). Running 3 icarus autocannons might actually be necessary due to the threat of eldar flyers. Then you can take a CADIAN mortar battalion to sit in the back. Let me see if I can get a tournament next week. That list sounds like a riot.
If you're running 3 Gallants, then i don't really see the need for the Smashcaptains. You already have 3 massive melee threats, that it'd prob be better aiming for some ranged/horde dealing options.
I'm personally starting to think Mortan Gallant with the +2" warlord trait and Helm of the Nameless Warrior relic. Essentially giving it 6 attacks on the turn it charges, with WS 2 and re-rolling 1's.
My thinking with the smash captains is that they can threaten the dark reapers on a 12" tall building, or the reapers embarked inside of an ITC building, and they can kill airplanes that knights flatly cannot hit and cannot walk around. Melee knights still have giant weaknesses against embarked devastators / reapers / other hard shooting heavy support infantry. Captain smash is a 90% kill on one of those units per turn. The big boys need someone to go up on the ledges and kill those things. Custodes bike captains would also do a similar job, but they don't provide as much CP and cost more points. 3x shield captains is 480 points and 1CP, 2x smash + 3x scouts is 410 points and 5CP. Captain smash is also the one thing in IMPERIUM that can block overwatch when you actually need to block overwatch for a Gallant. Think shadowsword, Y'vhara, Valiant, etc.
Silentz wrote: I don't get the point of Gallants though - why not Errants so you at least have a gun?
It's not like having 2 melee weapons means you can use them both... seems almost pointless to take a Gallant.
Enlighten me!
Options.
Gauntlet can be a laugh, and near essential against large foes. Chainblade thing is multipurpose, but not as effective against particularly tough customers.
Of course, beyond lobbing things around (funny), I’m not entirely sold that the Gauntlet is all that necessary. You’re trading a greater chance of wounding, for a lower chance of hitting, I’m not familiar enough with 8th Ed to say which is more reliable in most situations, but I suspect it’s roughly equal? Infantry of course we just tap dance on. So much tap dancing in fact, I’m tempted to greenstuff (poorly, because it’s me) Tophats to be plonked on when in combat,
So, do we know if we get some kind of exception to the Character rule for Relics? Otherwise, actually having 3 Characters to make use of all we can take (Warlord + 2 from Strat) seems fairly hard to pull off, at least if you care about CP to actually use the strat with.
EDIT: NEVERMIND, just saw Exalted Court stratagem.
Eldarain wrote: The relic gauntlet and squish strategem is nice to see for gauntlet fans.
So is the Mortan House Tradition (rerolls in CC and +1 to hit on Charge). If your Mortan Gallant gets to where it needs to be, it will annihilate whatever it connects with.
Realistically, you’re only likely to have one Castellan, for example. So instead of looking at the normal profile of its plasma decimator, it makes sense to look at Cawl’s wrath. I’d be surprised to see a Castellan fielder without it, as it’s a truly awesome weapon.
The same applies to the fist. A normal fist is a bit weak. The relic fist, especially combined with the stratagem, is ridiculously awesome.
The army seriously eats cps though and, as discussed at length already, doesn’t get loads of them. One way around this is to take freeblades, who get to take relics anyway.
I do like the idea of an admech battalion to go with my Taranis knights. Turn one I can pick the reroll 1s to shoot canticle and make my Castellan a knight of the cog, while it fires overcharged plasma and a missile at some character. Turn two and I can make it reroll 1s to hit in melee and use the strat on a gallant - or whatever.
So wait, Knight Valiant and Knight Castellan are not a dual kit, but 2 different kits? And both have only 1 face plate that is unique to said variant? That's kinda disappointing
Irbis wrote: So wait, Knight Valiant and Knight Castellan are not a dual kit, but 2 different kits? And both have only 1 face plate that is unique to said variant? That's kinda disappointing
you always have the bare face, and bits from the opposite kit if you want variety :p
It is a bit annoying that certain armour panels in the Valiant kit are Mechanicus only and visa-versa for the Castellan. The lack of variety in face plates is also disappointing. So.. gone with the Lance bundle.
I do like the new terrain sprue they did for the shrine, the cogitator even has an Adeptus Mechanicus symbol on the back instead of the Aquila found on the one in the objectives boxed set.
I'm a bit confused by what the Renegade set means when it talks about being able to use two Imperial Knights and then a load of weapon options.
What Knights can you actually build from it? I think it's everything except for the special big (Castellan and Valiant) and special little (Armiger) ones but I'd rather be sure.
Eldarain wrote: The relic gauntlet and squish strategem is nice to see for gauntlet fans.
So is the Mortan House Tradition (rerolls in CC and +1 to hit on Charge). If your Mortan Gallant gets to where it needs to be, it will annihilate whatever it connects with.
Exactly. Mortan Gallant with the +2 to assault and charge rolls, flying forward is going to get a turn 1 charge, that then hits on 2's and re-rolls hits with whatever you weapon you want.
Realistically, you’re only likely to have one Castellan, for example. So instead of looking at the normal profile of its plasma decimator, it makes sense to look at Cawl’s wrath. I’d be surprised to see a Castellan fielder without it, as it’s a truly awesome weapon.
The same applies to the fist. A normal fist is a bit weak. The relic fist, especially combined with the stratagem, is ridiculously awesome.
The army seriously eats cps though and, as discussed at length already, doesn’t get loads of them. One way around this is to take freeblades, who get to take relics anyway.
I do like the idea of an admech battalion to go with my Taranis knights. Turn one I can pick the reroll 1s to shoot canticle and make my Castellan a knight of the cog, while it fires overcharged plasma and a missile at some character. Turn two and I can make it reroll 1s to hit in melee and use the strat on a gallant - or whatever.
Only issue with the relic plasma weapon, is that it is locked into Mechanicus only houses. Which imo, is a big downer.
Wait, I just noticed Knight SE codex has Keeper of Secrets on the cover.
<tinfoil hat on> Slaanesh confirmed
pm713 wrote: I'm a bit confused by what the Renegade set means when it talks about being able to use two Imperial Knights and then a load of weapon options.
What Knights can you actually build from it? I think it's everything except for the special big (Castellan and Valiant) and special little (Armiger) ones but I'd rather be sure.
You get 2x basic knight and 1x upgrade sprue. So, you can freely build two basic IK, 1 basic and 1 upgraded, or 2 upgraded if you juggle bits and give them different weapons like carapace guns since you only get one of each.
Eldarain wrote: The relic gauntlet and squish strategem is nice to see for gauntlet fans.
So is the Mortan House Tradition (rerolls in CC and +1 to hit on Charge). If your Mortan Gallant gets to where it needs to be, it will annihilate whatever it connects with.
Exactly. Mortan Gallant with the +2 to assault and charge rolls, flying forward is going to get a turn 1 charge, that then hits on 2's and re-rolls hits with whatever you weapon you want.
Realistically, you’re only likely to have one Castellan, for example. So instead of looking at the normal profile of its plasma decimator, it makes sense to look at Cawl’s wrath. I’d be surprised to see a Castellan fielder without it, as it’s a truly awesome weapon.
The same applies to the fist. A normal fist is a bit weak. The relic fist, especially combined with the stratagem, is ridiculously awesome.
The army seriously eats cps though and, as discussed at length already, doesn’t get loads of them. One way around this is to take freeblades, who get to take relics anyway.
I do like the idea of an admech battalion to go with my Taranis knights. Turn one I can pick the reroll 1s to shoot canticle and make my Castellan a knight of the cog, while it fires overcharged plasma and a missile at some character. Turn two and I can make it reroll 1s to hit in melee and use the strat on a gallant - or whatever.
Only issue with the relic plasma weapon, is that it is locked into Mechanicus only houses. Which imo, is a big downer.
good thing mechanicus has the best strats. The one that lets a knight fight at full effect even when its almost dead is awesome.
Eldarain wrote: The relic gauntlet and squish strategem is nice to see for gauntlet fans.
So is the Mortan House Tradition (rerolls in CC and +1 to hit on Charge). If your Mortan Gallant gets to where it needs to be, it will annihilate whatever it connects with.
Exactly. Mortan Gallant with the +2 to assault and charge rolls, flying forward is going to get a turn 1 charge, that then hits on 2's and re-rolls hits with whatever you weapon you want.
Realistically, you’re only likely to have one Castellan, for example. So instead of looking at the normal profile of its plasma decimator, it makes sense to look at Cawl’s wrath. I’d be surprised to see a Castellan fielder without it, as it’s a truly awesome weapon.
The same applies to the fist. A normal fist is a bit weak. The relic fist, especially combined with the stratagem, is ridiculously awesome.
The army seriously eats cps though and, as discussed at length already, doesn’t get loads of them. One way around this is to take freeblades, who get to take relics anyway.
I do like the idea of an admech battalion to go with my Taranis knights. Turn one I can pick the reroll 1s to shoot canticle and make my Castellan a knight of the cog, while it fires overcharged plasma and a missile at some character. Turn two and I can make it reroll 1s to hit in melee and use the strat on a gallant - or whatever.
Only issue with the relic plasma weapon, is that it is locked into Mechanicus only houses. Which imo, is a big downer.
good thing mechanicus has the best strats. The one that lets a knight fight at full effect even when its almost dead is awesome.
I personally prefer the Imperial traits though. They seem to me to have more synergy overall, whereas i think the only "focused" mechcanicus one is Krast and i'm not sure i'd use it as it is 100% focused on melee.
pm713 wrote: Thanks for the replies people. The set sounds very much worthwhile.
It is the such an amazing deal. I don't even know what I want to make with it. So many options! The terrain will go nicely with my existing terrain too.
I might make another Warden with a fist and Stormspear, but have him be a mirror image of the other one. Fluff them as being twins.
pm713 wrote: I'm a bit confused by what the Renegade set means when it talks about being able to use two Imperial Knights and then a load of weapon options.
What Knights can you actually build from it? I think it's everything except for the special big (Castellan and Valiant) and special little (Armiger) ones but I'd rather be sure.
You get :
Two chainswords
One fist
One gatling cannon
Two guns that can both be built as either melta or battle cannon
One carapace AA gun
One carapace missile pod that can be built two ways.
You can build all five basic knights but not any combination of them - for example two crusaders, two wardens or warden plus crusader are all not possible.
I wonder if the Preceptor kit will have the Thunderstrike Gauntlet on an all new sprue, or if the Warden sprue will be included in its entirety. My guess is it will be recut onto a new sprue.
Still, I would love for another Avenger Gatling Cannon
Edit: War of Sigmar answered a question I had. Freeblades CAN be added to Knight Lances without anyone losing benefits. So I will definitely be running Canis Rex and two House Knights. Yes!
pm713 wrote: I'm a bit confused by what the Renegade set means when it talks about being able to use two Imperial Knights and then a load of weapon options.
What Knights can you actually build from it? I think it's everything except for the special big (Castellan and Valiant) and special little (Armiger) ones but I'd rather be sure.
You get :
Two chainswords
One fist
One gatling cannon
Two guns that can both be built as either melta or battle cannon
One carapace AA gun
One carapace missile pod that can be built two ways.
You can build all five basic knights but not any combination of them - for example two crusaders, two wardens or warden plus crusader are all not possible.
Possible however is Warden and Paladin, which is why i called my FLGS today the second they opened to preorder. FOR TYBALT AND BALTHAZAR!!!!
casvalremdeikun wrote: I wonder if the Preceptor kit will have the Thunderstrike Gauntlet on an all new sprue, or if the Warden sprue will be included in its entirety. My guess is it will be recut onto a new sprue.
Still, I would love for another Avenger Gatling Cannon
Edit: War of Sigmar answered a question I had. Freeblades CAN be added to Knight Lances without anyone losing benefits. So I will definitely be running Canis Rex and two House Knights. Yes!
A heavily recut Warden sprue would be my guess. The new laser weapon looks like it uses the same back half as the Battle and Thermal cannons. So removing the Avenger would free up a lot of sprue space for new stuff while keeping options like the melta gun and carapace weapons. It would also explain why GW haven't used this kit to add another double gun build to the range.
casvalremdeikun wrote: I wonder if the Preceptor kit will have the Thunderstrike Gauntlet on an all new sprue, or if the Warden sprue will be included in its entirety. My guess is it will be recut onto a new sprue.
Still, I would love for another Avenger Gatling Cannon
Edit: War of Sigmar answered a question I had. Freeblades CAN be added to Knight Lances without anyone losing benefits. So I will definitely be running Canis Rex and two House Knights. Yes!
A heavily recut Warden sprue would be my guess. The new laser weapon looks like it uses the same back half as the Battle and Thermal cannons. So removing the Avenger would free up a lot of sprue space for new stuff while keeping options like the melta gun and carapace weapons. It would also explain why GW haven't used this kit to add another double gun build to the range.
That would be my guess too. The part that would be the hardest is the entire new back Carapace and the pilot. All of the new bits are probably enough to make a whole new sprue.
McMagnus Mindbullets wrote: Has anyone put together a summary of the points costs? I want to know but don't have time to look through 2 hour codex reviews.
So, when i first started watching this i wasn't sure about it, but, i stuck with it and found it really helpful as a quick breakdown, and pretty hilarious!
Awesome, glad you found it helpful, I'll be trying to do something similar for future codexes
So, when i first started watching this i wasn't sure about it, but, i stuck with it and found it really helpful as a quick breakdown, and pretty hilarious!
Awesome, glad you found it helpful, I'll be trying to do something similar for future codexes
Apple Peel wrote: What battlefield role does the Preceptor have besides boost Armigers?
None.
Las cutter arm is underwhelming. He’s basically there to boost the Helverins and deter those that want to close with those same Helverins.
Not a surprise that Rex does not have the same ability. The preceptors are the men-at-arms, the trainers for the house. Rex is a Greeblade, so no house to train.
Apple Peel wrote: What battlefield role does the Preceptor have besides boost Armigers?
None.
Las cutter arm is underwhelming. He’s basically there to boost the Helverins and deter those that want to close with those same Helverins.
Not a surprise that Rex does not have the same ability. The preceptors are the men-at-arms, the trainers for the house. Rex is a Greeblade, so no house to train.
I see. I didn’t particularly like the sound of it anyway. Thanks.
casvalremdeikun wrote: That would be my guess too. The part that would be the hardest is the entire new back Carapace and the pilot. All of the new bits are probably enough to make a whole new sprue.
Entire new back Carapace? I do not think that is a thing. Same carapace, open hatch instead of closed hatch which are both separate anyway.
Danit wrote: Does anyone have a cleare pic of the knight lance page. Is it a special rule or a brand new detachment.
It’s a special rule that applies to IK super heavy detachments - not a new detachment. One of your guys gets to be a character but you only get your cps if you bring 3 proper knights - not armigers.
Danit wrote: Does anyone have a cleare pic of the knight lance page. Is it a special rule or a brand new detachment.
It’s a special rule that applies to IK super heavy detachments - not a new detachment. One of your guys gets to be a character but you only get your cps if you bring 3 proper knights - not armigers.
Man thats really disappointing, hopefully they will change it to a new detachment when armiger sales dont do as hot.
House Mortan+The Paragon Gauntlet+Death Grip is going to be insanely fun to see on a turn my Knight charges. Basically, "Oh, you mean my 8 DMG fist that hits on 2s didn't kill your model, that's okay, let's roll off with my Str 8 model vs your Str 6 model. AFTER I do an additional d3 DMG!".
So have we confirmed that the missiles are 12 points per missile? And that each silo means you’re taking 2 of them?
Also we can only do 2 and 1 or 1 and 2 for the missile vs autocannons on top right?
Lastly, one review had listed the missiles as free for the valiant. This is incorrect yes?
I’m thinking one Castellan and one valiant plus an Armiger, which gives me enough points for a guard batallion and a BA batallion. Even without the 3 CP for the knight detachment, that’s still 13 CP with a lot of ways to regenerate the CP.
But I’m wondering if the valiant is worth it at all. I’d take it in a heartbeat if I could take a second flamer on it, but as is I’m less inclined.
Also, the giant plasma weapon is a lot more spicy as the relic. Not sure how I feel about the non-relic version
2. it's cute how people think their individual $$$ counts for much, meanwhile GW continues to make record profits.
people will still rush out and buy these models regardless what a vocal minority think. they are doing it like so, because the controversy is less this way.
it's not gonna limit any significant sales.
How cute some people still think gw can or even care about balance as it's been repeatedly shown to be false.
is this why there are multiple pages of complaints about this not fair or some such? well either way GW limited CP's via a detachment.
either buy in or don't. it won't affect them much if you or your three friends don't buy these models/codex.
casvalremdeikun wrote: House Mortan+The Paragon Gauntlet+Death Grip is going to be insanely fun to see on a turn my Knight charges. Basically, "Oh, you mean my 8 DMG fist that hits on 2s didn't kill your model, that's okay, let's roll off with my Str 8 model vs your Str 6 model. AFTER I do an additional d3 DMG!".
Ahem. It's deal d3 mortals then roll off, and if you win deal d3 more.
casvalremdeikun wrote: House Mortan+The Paragon Gauntlet+Death Grip is going to be insanely fun to see on a turn my Knight charges. Basically, "Oh, you mean my 8 DMG fist that hits on 2s didn't kill your model, that's okay, let's roll off with my Str 8 model vs your Str 6 model. AFTER I do an additional d3 DMG!".
Ahem. It's deal d3 mortals then roll off, and if you win deal d3 more.
Ad nauseam.
Oh I know. It sounds nuts. And there is no limit as to what you can crush. Want to crush another Knight? You damn well can (though it probably didn't live through the barrage of attacks). That pesky Riptide causing you grief? Crush him until the blue filling pops out. It just seems hilarious. I can't wait to use it.
buddha wrote: Are we thinking heligers or warglaives at this point?
The Chainsword sweep ability took care of a lot of the CC issues of the Warglaive. The regular gun isn't terrible either. The Helverin is decent too, though. They both serve completely different purposes, though. Warglaives are cheaper too. And they are more mobile (House Raven Helverin will be a beast though due to mobility).
We can have more than one knight house in the same detachment right? We just don’t get the command benefit of the given house but could give relics/WL traits and use stratagems that are house specific right?
luke1705 wrote: We can have more than one knight house in the same detachment right? We just don’t get the command benefit of the given house but could give relics/WL traits and use stratagems that are house specific right?
I don’t know?
Can you mix chapters of marines and still get relics?
luke1705 wrote: We can have more than one knight house in the same detachment right? We just don’t get the command benefit of the given house but could give relics/WL traits and use stratagems that are house specific right?
I don’t know?
Can you mix chapters of marines and still get relics?
Yes to relics
Yes to warlord traits
Strats usually say “include any Astra Militarum detachments” so the analogue here would be “if your army is battle forged and includes any questor imperialis detachments....”
luke1705 wrote: We can have more than one knight house in the same detachment right? We just don’t get the command benefit of the given house but could give relics/WL traits and use stratagems that are house specific right?
I don’t know?
Can you mix chapters of marines and still get relics?
You can yes, although literally no one does that because the Chapter Tactics are useful. However, with the household abilities of Knights looking to be fairly bad (close combat oriented in a shooting based game...) it might make sense to ignore them and load up on relics and stratagem bonuses.
luke1705 wrote: We can have more than one knight house in the same detachment right? We just don’t get the command benefit of the given house but could give relics/WL traits and use stratagems that are house specific right?
I don’t know?
Can you mix chapters of marines and still get relics?
You can yes, although literally no one does that because the Chapter Tactics are useful. However, with the household abilities of Knights looking to be fairly bad (close combat oriented in a shooting based game...) it might make sense to ignore them and load up on relics and stratagem bonuses.
Knights are rather strong, with solid cc damage, and do not give up shooting to do so, being superheavies.
McMagnus Mindbullets wrote: Has anyone put together a summary of the points costs? I want to know but don't have time to look through 2 hour codex reviews.
luke1705 wrote: We can have more than one knight house in the same detachment right? We just don’t get the command benefit of the given house but could give relics/WL traits and use stratagems that are house specific right?
I don’t know?
Can you mix chapters of marines and still get relics?
You can yes, although literally no one does that because the Chapter Tactics are useful. However, with the household abilities of Knights looking to be fairly bad (close combat oriented in a shooting based game...) it might make sense to ignore them and load up on relics and stratagem bonuses.
Knights are rather strong, with solid cc damage, and do not give up shooting to do so, being superheavies.
That wasn't my point nor did I say they didn't have solid CC damage. You're right, they don't give up shooting being superheavies which is why having more households devoted to actually providing *shooting* benefits would have been way better. The key part was that 40k is a majority shooting based game, so it seems silly to devote so many household abilities to CC.
buddha wrote: Are we thinking heligers or warglaives at this point?
The Chainsword sweep ability took care of a lot of the CC issues of the Warglaive. The regular gun isn't terrible either. The Helverin is decent too, though. They both serve completely different purposes, though. Warglaives are cheaper too. And they are more mobile (House Raven Helverin will be a beast though due to mobility).
I don't think at this point it's a question of Warglaive or Helverin but rather what proportion. they seem to support each other well. one being a get in your face type and the other supporting it from long range.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Warhams-77 wrote: I may have missed something but these are its leaked rules
Giving up your shooting in order to get bonus movement to charge your opponents chaff isn't a benefit. I honestly am at a loss of why GW thought that a knight giving up its shooting is anything but a massive negative. On top of that, this terrain probably costs points.
Of course, it could work if you're playing against someone that doesn't understand screening too well.
well either way 
