I play a knight army for fluff and I really like it but I find that they tend to die quickly in many cases and Im often left wondering if maybe they need some adjustments with all the changes to monstrous creatures and there being so much out there that can rip them apart or glance them to death. I guess I just wish they played a little stronger. What changes do you think could be made to make them a more viable choice for gameplay in numbers?

Personally, i think they need a boost in survivability. Something along the lines of the Ion shield 4+ being on all sides and working in combat. That may be a bit extreme but I do feel like they need some type of subtle change to make them wht they should be, which is to say something strong enough to make a decent force out of by itself.

Nope. There are too many weapons they are straight up immune to. I have to pack an inordinate amount of melta in my lists just because these things exist. They should actually be a bit flimsier, I think. And their weapons need nerfed a bit, too.

Possibly a permanent 5+ against glancing hits and the ion shield being 4+ against everything on a facing of your choice?

Unfortunately that makes them very similar to the chaos kinghts when they get a mark that they pay points for.

Edit: I do believe all vehicles should get a 5+ against glances though so I don't know.

Make the ion shield 5++ invuln and leave it at that. They are too hard for TAC lists to kill already.

Just to clarify, we're talking Imperial Knights, right? I have to think so based on the ion shield comment, but it was a bit unclear.

Imperial Knights are odd in that they're sort of a rock, paper, scissors army that is composed entirely of rocks. Armies that can deal with them can deal with them. If your opponent happened to bring some strength d stuff, lots of haywire attacks, drop pod melta, or any number of other things that are effective against knights, he's basically bringing the paper to your rock. On the other hand, there are plenty of armies (tyranids and daemons mostly) that will really struggle to do anything at all to a bunch of high AV walkers with stomp.

Running an army of knights is like running an army of flyers; armies that bring lots of air will bring you down hard, and armies that don't have a lot of anti-air will feel like they can't meaningfully hurt you at all. I've seen grey knight players win games against Imperial Knights by simply standing on more objectives than the adamantine lance and refusing to die quickly enough to lose the game.

I'm generally opposed to a rule that makes the ion shield work on all sides. Forcing your opponent to deploy the shield against one side and then sucker punching him in the other side is an interesting interaction. Make the shield affect all sides would reduce the number of interesting decisions your opponents have to make.

No.

Stomp does, however.

Yeah, dreadknight are pretty damn broken, hence why you always see at least 2, even in a 1000 point game!

Wait, someone wants to buff Knights?

No. They're fine. If anything, they need a nerf.

trying to play a one dimensional army list and then being concerned that it underperforms doesnt show me the need for a change to the units. The game isnt designed to benefit a list like that, IMO it would be a really stupid game if 5 superheavies could be a viable list.

And NO...


If anything they need to be nerfed in a few ways.

There's a reason everybody takes one, and it has nothing to do with fluff.

They should have stayed as LOW and not been made into a codex army.


I am looking forward to Codex:Thunderhawk however...

I think they are fine.

currently I play two armies that are kinda crippled against most knight army lists.

either not enough glancing or not enough pen power.

they (as said above) are a Rock Paper Scissors army, and that is not a bad thing, and really something that I would like more of in 40k (for all armies that is, not just the few that GW hasn't updated yet).

They are not flimsy, and have enough damage output, and damage absorption to balance one another out. If anything, the upgrade they need is some type of way to modify your army, or to be a force modifier (similar to the stompa for the orks).

just my $0.02.

Actually, knights are fine as is. At my house, they take damage from the chart, but with the following exceptions

Ignore crew stunned/shaken
Immobilized results halve movement speed. Multiple immobilized results don't lower this further, but does cause the extra hull point loss as normal.

I see what you guys are saying. I think my problem is that at my LGS we usually do campaigns with paired games where we're restricted to two books for the duration. So whenever anyone plays me they pretty much know to bring a super anti-knight list. Its still the rock paper scissor analogy, but my opponent always knows I'm throwing rock... I think maybe it skewing my perspective on the matter.

I think the Wraith Knight needs a nerf or points increase. The darn thing gets an invul save all around and jumps around! No way should my 5 IK lose to 2 WK. Or you make the Gallant 295pts and all the other Knights 30pts cheaper.

Imperial Knights gets smashed by monsterous creatures. MC such as daemon princes get lucky with their 5++ invul. Also their high WS makes it very hard for me to hit with a WS4.

I wish their was the venerable upgrade that makes the opponents re roll their successful penetration. Atleast theh get to cheat their rolls is they good at it.

Maybe an upgrade to disable all haywire results from 2-5. Maybe some Ceramite Armor upgrade to stop melta.

Knights are very strong, for the points, and don't need any buffs or modifications at all. Your real problem seems to be that you're a one trick pony.
Why not bring them as allies to another army? That way you still have the punch of a Knight, but your opponent has other stuff to deal with.
Anyone would also start to lose in fairly short order if they played the same thing again and again, as it gives their opponents time to learn how to neutralise and manipulate the army.

Less a problem with the Knights themselves and more a problem with the stupid levels of power creep. Eldar alone have Haywire, AP0 Meltas, and ohh yeah what are those things called again? A plethora of D weapons? yup.

The biggest problem knights face is that most armies have WAY to much anti tank weaponry.

This thread is so ambigious.

Wraithknights?
Dreadknights?
Imperial Knights?
GODDAMN IT OP SPECIFY!

>Actually he said they need to be strongers so Wraith and Dread are clearly not the topic

 Dramagod2 wrote:
I see what you guys are saying. I think my problem is that at my LGS we usually do campaigns with paired games where we're restricted to two books for the duration. So whenever anyone plays me they pretty much know to bring a super anti-knight list. Its still the rock paper scissor analogy, but my opponent always knows I'm throwing rock... I think maybe it skewing my perspective on the matter.

It is very much skewing your perspective.

Knights are fine, and if anything, overpowered and could use a touch of the old nerf bat.

With Wraithknights existing Imperial Knights are weak.

 Reinokarite wrote:
With Wraithknights existing Imperial Knights are weak.

Don't forget with dreadknight too

ninety0ne wrote:
trying to play a one dimensional army list and then being concerned that it underperforms doesnt show me the need for a change to the units. The game isnt designed to benefit a list like that, IMO it would be a really stupid game if 5 superheavies could be a viable list.

It is for the Eldar...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CT GAMER wrote:
Codex:Thunderhawk

Made me cringe.

 Blacksails wrote:
Wait, someone wants to buff Knights?

No. They're fine. If anything, they need a nerf.

Quoted for truth.

Just because a small handful of armies can deal with them easily doesn't mean they need a buff.

Well shoot, Grav exists, buff the Wraithknight! Hmm, no.

 Reinokarite wrote:
With Wraithknights existing Imperial Knights are weak.

I think this may be the main point Im making. I understand that imperial knights are strong against some things and that there are many things in the game which are not a legit threat to them but compared to other giant things in the game, they don't seem to stack up that well. They are pwerful, there is no denying that. With an army of five models theyd better be. My argument is just that compared to how other units (wraithknight, dreadknight), they just seem either overcosted or underpowered. If the wraithknight is the bar, then the imperial is simply not well designed or way to expensive.

The dreadknight is pretty weak against a lot of lists now and will only get weaker as the new codices roll out.

 krodarklorr wrote:

Well shoot, Grav exists, buff the Wraithknight! Hmm, no.

Wait, you mean you think the WK isn't underpowered? At best it can one-shot a tank, that's hardly much. I've seen Lascannons one-shot a tank, and nobody ever called them op. You can take dozens of the things.

I know that asking for balance in this games is kinda a lost cause, but I suppose Im just asking for some type of balance among the superheavies. I realize that for people who don't play knights that you think Im griping over nothing, but anyone who plays them or uses them regularly knows that when compared to other superheavies in the games, they just don't stand up. If I face an eldar army with two wraithknights and a score of other units, either the two wraithknights alone shouldn't be able to wipe out my entire army or my army should be able to hold up better against them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
It just doesnt make sense to have the wraithknight for its cost and then the imperial knight for it's cost, atleast one needs to be changed for there to be any semblance of balance or fairness between the superheavies of different factions

Wraithknights wipe out more armies than IK, though. You NEED very specific weaponry against them or you lose. The same goes for IK, but the weapons are different. It's very easy to field a space marine list that straight up loses to knights every game.

While I believe current imperial knights need neither buff nor nerf, I think specific formations should be kept in check whether by house-ruling or consultations between players.
(If restriction is really needed)
For example, the adamantine lance formation allowing re-rolls on ion shield saves.
That, or Exalted Court of House Terryn, which includes Knight Errants with Interceptor blowing melta pods with impunity or other knights allowing friendly knights to resolve overwatch.

 Dramagod2 wrote:
I know that asking for balance in this games is kinda a lost cause, but I suppose Im just asking for some type of balance among the superheavies. I realize that for people who don't play knights that you think Im griping over nothing, but anyone who plays them or uses them regularly knows that when compared to other superheavies in the games, they just don't stand up. If I face an eldar army with two wraithknights and a score of other units, either the two wraithknights alone shouldn't be able to wipe out my entire army or my army should be able to hold up better against them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
It just doesnt make sense to have the wraithknight for its cost and then the imperial knight for it's cost, atleast one needs to be changed for there to be any semblance of balance or fairness between the superheavies of different factions

But your Imperial Knight (singular) against my Obelisk or Tesseract Vault. We'll see who wins. (Spoiler, more times than not, the Knight wins)

And the only reason Wraithknights are able to "wipe out" Imperial Knights is because of better ranged weapons (aka Strength D). Roll a 6 and boom, dead knight. Once 8th edition comes out and Strength D is nerfed even more (yeah, I'll make that bet) then it shouldn't be as much of a problem.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Selym wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Well shoot, Grav exists, buff the Wraithknight! Hmm, no.

Wait, you mean you think the WK isn't underpowered? At best it can one-shot a tank, that's hardly much. I've seen Lascannons one-shot a tank, and nobody ever called them op. You can take dozens of the things.

Yes, they can one shot a tank, or an Imperial Knight, or a Tervigon. And stomps. Heck, I'm sure against most armies, the Wraithknights do more damage simply by charging things, even without the melee weapon.

So no, Wraithknights are not underpowered.

 krodarklorr wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Well shoot, Grav exists, buff the Wraithknight! Hmm, no.

Wait, you mean you think the WK isn't underpowered? At best it can one-shot a tank, that's hardly much. I've seen Lascannons one-shot a tank, and nobody ever called them op. You can take dozens of the things.

Yes, they can one shot a tank, or an Imperial Knight, or a Tervigon. And stomps. Heck, I'm sure against most armies, the Wraithknights do more damage simply by charging things, even without the melee weapon.

So no, Wraithknights are not underpowered.

T'was the joke before srsness, when all through the forum, no sense of humour appeared, not even a giggle.

 Selym wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Well shoot, Grav exists, buff the Wraithknight! Hmm, no.

Wait, you mean you think the WK isn't underpowered? At best it can one-shot a tank, that's hardly much. I've seen Lascannons one-shot a tank, and nobody ever called them op. You can take dozens of the things.

Yes, they can one shot a tank, or an Imperial Knight, or a Tervigon. And stomps. Heck, I'm sure against most armies, the Wraithknights do more damage simply by charging things, even without the melee weapon.

So no, Wraithknights are not underpowered.

T'was the joke before srsness, when all through the forum, no sense of humour appeared, not even a giggle.

Hard to tell online, but I figured as much.

Are you serious? 1 Daemon Prince at 250 can smash a 370pts IK. The DP gas an invul to dodge the chainsword and the higher WS makes it harder for the IK to land a hit on the dp.

 Filch wrote:
Are you serious? 1 Daemon Prince at 250 can smash a 370pts IK. The DP gas an invul to dodge the chainsword and the higher WS makes it harder for the IK to land a hit on the dp.

Sorry? Join the rest of us?

Martel732 wrote:

 Filch wrote:
Are you serious? 1 Daemon Prince at 250 can smash a 370pts IK. The DP gas an invul to dodge the chainsword and the higher WS makes it harder for the IK to land a hit on the dp.

Sorry? Join the rest of us?

But the problem is that the majority of "the rest of us" don't pay 400pts for a single model. A unit that costs that much should be able to hold up at least a little but they tend to open like poorly manufactured tin cans. Kinda the same issue as regular dreads but on a much larger scale.

I propose 2 glancing hits is required to cause 1 glancing hit on a Super heavy walker.

Like I said before, reducing the cost of the Gallant to 295 like a Wraith Knight with glaive and shield would make things even. Also knocking off 30pts on each IK variant would make everything on par with WK.

What if we can add a shield on the Reaper Chain Sword which would confer a 6++ in combat? This shield would be place towards the back of the sword and be like a parring buckler. What if the TS Gauntlet also had that shield option and when combined with the other shield on a Reaper Chain sword it would grant a 5++ in close combat. The shield would be on the back of the hand also like a buckler.

In order for it to not be like the Chaos IK which becomes a daemon granting a 5++ in shooting and combat. The little buckler shields would only work in combat in conjunction with the ion shields which only stops incoming ranged fire. The cost of the shield on the reaper chain sword would cost more than the one bought on by the TS gauntlet because the TS gauntlet already costs 10pts. For example a Warden with a TS gauntlet can get the shield for 15pts. If it only had the reaper chain sword then the shield option for that arm would be 25pts. A gallant can then spend 25pts to get a reaper chain sword buckler and 15pts to get a guantlet buckler.

Would a 365pt Gallant with 5++ in close combat be cost effective? Not when you have a WK at 295. but it is a nice option to have.

A single model with quite a bit of firepower, a D-weapon on one arm, 6 Hull Points, immune to the damage table, and an Invuln on one facing is more than most of us can fit into 500 pts.

I think Imperial Knights are fine as they are.
They probably are a bit too good against TAC armies, but in general the points are about right.

 Selym wrote:
A single model with quite a bit of firepower, a D-weapon on one arm, 6 Hull Points, immune to the damage table, and an Invuln on one facing is more than most of us can fit into 500 pts.

Eldar

warlock skyrunner @50

wind rider with 3 scat @81
wind rider with 2 scat @71

Wraith Knight (glaive n shield ) @295

Under 500pts.

1 IK will die easily to 5 scatter laser glancing side armor 12 and the WK will win combat at I5 before an IK gets a swing off. Gargantuan can not be stomped by IK. GG your IK is jenk compared to WK.

 Filch wrote:

 Selym wrote:
A single model with quite a bit of firepower, a D-weapon on one arm, 6 Hull Points, immune to the damage table, and an Invuln on one facing is more than most of us can fit into 500 pts.

Eldar

warlock skyrunner @50

wind rider with 3 scat @81
wind rider with 2 scat @71

Wraith Knight (glaive n shield ) @295

Under 500pts.

1 IK will die easily to 5 scatter laser glancing side armor 12 and the WK will win combat at I5 before an IK gets a swing off. Gargantuan can not be stomped by IK. GG your IK is jenk compared to WK.

*most of us

Eldar cheese is an established fact in this, and many, editions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
A better solution is to nerf Eldar than to buff IK.

Although I was asking to reduce price of IK. I would rather see WK taxed 50pts or more.

I think Knights are ok as is, the problem is more when they have to face wraithknights than a problem with the knight itself.

The day that a WK costs ~400 points, and Scatterbikes get some sort of restriction is the day we can safely say 40k is getting closer to balanced.

 Filch wrote:

 Selym wrote:
A single model with quite a bit of firepower, a D-weapon on one arm, 6 Hull Points, immune to the damage table, and an Invuln on one facing is more than most of us can fit into 500 pts.

Eldar

warlock skyrunner @50

wind rider with 3 scat @81
wind rider with 2 scat @71

Wraith Knight (glaive n shield ) @295

Under 500pts.

1 IK will die easily to 5 scatter laser glancing side armor 12 and the WK will win combat at I5 before an IK gets a swing off. Gargantuan can not be stomped by IK. GG your IK is jenk compared to WK.

What is this? An army losing to Eldar? Never!

Yeah, I'd go for those changes. 450 for the WK, and heavier weapons at 1 in 3 for Windriders, yes. Maybe make the scatter laser 20 points per model, but then let me take starcannons, 1 in 3, at 20 points per as well.

Eliminate scatterlaser as a choice for bikes entirely. They can already spam that stupid weapon so hard it's crazy.

Yeah, the comparisons with WKs doesn't mean Knights need buffs, but that WKs need nerfs.

 Filch wrote:

Also knocking off 30pts on each IK variant would make everything on par with WK.

'On par with a Wraithknight' is exactly where the game should not be heading IMO. If your metric for a unit's worth is that a Wraithknight does more, congratulations! You are on the right side of balance.
The simple solution to me is that an army of nothing-but-Knights is obviously, inherently imbalanced because exactly as mentioned earlier, you are playing Rock-Paper-Scissors with nothing but Rocks. The fluff makes plenty of allowance for non-Knight models and I'd suggest that all-Knight armies are supposed to be a rarity rather than the norm.

A good cloud of fodder around the Knight's ankles will do a decent job at deterring any drop-D or Melta. Get some bodies in the way of that Daemon Prince and he won't be swinging into AV. Even dropping a single Knight is going to give you enough points for an Imperial Command Squad and a chunky Platoon with some Conscripts. If you're a traitor, you get an even better deal out of IA13 Renegades and can swarm with 3pt Traitors that recycle after dying.

Taking nothing but Rocks and then complaining that they get Paper'd is no indication that the Rock is faulty. There has to be some player responsibility for creating a viable list and not only recognising the limits of your models, but taking corrective steps to prevent them becoming a liability. It's not your opponent's fault that they have found a way to topple Knights, and so you have the choice to either focus harder on downing his threat units, or changing up your army build to include a natural counter.

 Dramagod2 wrote:
I know that asking for balance in this games is kinda a lost cause, but I suppose Im just asking for some type of balance among the superheavies. I realize that for people who don't play knights that you think Im griping over nothing, but anyone who plays them or uses them regularly knows that when compared to other superheavies in the games, they just don't stand up. If I face an eldar army with two wraithknights and a score of other units, either the two wraithknights alone shouldn't be able to wipe out my entire army or my army should be able to hold up better against them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
It just doesnt make sense to have the wraithknight for its cost and then the imperial knight for it's cost, atleast one needs to be changed for there to be any semblance of balance or fairness between the superheavies of different factions

Don't try to compare wraithknights to anything else, if you do then everything is underpowered and in need of massive buffs. Imperial Knights are quite good and they see a fair amount of tournament play. Sure they have counters but a big portion of the game is about picking your engagements, movement, and target priority. Also Imp Knights are great as support to an army but in being the majority of your force (people who play Imperial Knights as the entirety of their army) it becomes a case that the enemy has enough counters to kill your stuff or they don't and get stomped into the ground.

Buff knights?

Considering how many units have 0 chance of hurting a knight its hard to take any of the posts asking for improvements to IKs as anything other than crackhead mary sue fantasies.

I am sorry that out of the ocean of models that have absolutely 0 chance of hurting a knight some can potentially kill a knight if the knight doesn't kill them first, welcome to how most people have to play the game.

blaktoof wrote:
Considering how many units have 0 chance of hurting a knight its hard to take any of the posts asking for improvements to IKs as anything other than crackhead mary sue fantasies.

I am sorry that out of the ocean of models that have absolutely 0 chance of hurting a knight some can potentially kill a knight if the knight doesn't kill them first, welcome to how most people have to play the game.

You sound like you're suffering from post traumatic stomp disorder....

 Dramagod2 wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
Considering how many units have 0 chance of hurting a knight its hard to take any of the posts asking for improvements to IKs as anything other than crackhead mary sue fantasies.

I am sorry that out of the ocean of models that have absolutely 0 chance of hurting a knight some can potentially kill a knight if the knight doesn't kill them first, welcome to how most people have to play the game.

You sound like you're suffering from post traumatic stomp disorder....

To be reasonable, Knights are SHV, and do not suffer the vehicle damage table like normal vehicles do, they really do not need any buffing. The next IK codex could come out with 0 changes to it, except increase the costs of knights by +50pts each- and people would still play them as often. Same for WKS for that matter. Heck if WKs jumped up +100pts, you would still see them pretty much the same amount.

 Filch wrote:
Are you serious? 1 Daemon Prince at 250 can smash a 370pts IK. The DP gas an invul to dodge the chainsword and the higher WS makes it harder for the IK to land a hit on the dp.

Filch you know that a Wraithknight will get smashed too?

 GoonBandito wrote:
Baleswords (Nurgle Greater Magic Weapon for 20pts) have Instant Death. If you happen to get Iron Arm as a psychic power, which isn't unreasonable if you are a ML3 Psyker, then you are WS9, S9, I8, AP2, Poisoned 4+, Instant Death. You'll be wounding Wraithknights on a 3+ (re-rolling because of higher Strength with a poisoned weapon), ignoring its FNP and doing d3 wounds for each unsaved.

Maybe don't try and kill a souped-up DP in melee! If you insist on doing things the hard way, at the very least take a Lancer and use the Concussive weapon first so you get an advantage in Initiative.

MC smashing gets to re roll penetration hits on vehicles . Does a MC get to reroll to wound on a GMC?

Being a GMC has so many advantages over SHV. Poison only wounds on a 6s. Often gets free fnp. Often has an invul save.

I'd prefer no GMCs and no SHVs at all. I can't stand how the catastrophic explosion kills my 4+ save melta teams... that's how it is though.

Survive, adapt, win.

 Filch wrote:
MC smashing gets to re roll penetration hits on vehicles . Does a MC get to reroll to wound on a GMC?

Being a GMC has so many advantages over SHV. Poison only wounds on a 6s. Often gets free fnp. Often has an invul save.

Wait. The WK is a GMC?

For FETH's sake.

You're gonna love the new Riptide, then

Yoyoyo wrote:
You're gonna love the new Riptide, then

What new Riptide? You mean that ungodly KXV-136 Supremacy Battlesuit?

Yoyoyo wrote:
You're gonna love the new Riptide, then

At least I can Dop Pod some Grav.

Bloody 'Tides.

THe only issue I find with a full army of Knights is that, depite it being a wall of rocks and laughing at all the scissor players out there, is that there is way to much Paper in the game at the moment, for fractions of the points cost.

When a unit of 5 Wraithguard for 160(?) points can remove ~500 points of Imperial Walking Fortress it does beg the question why bother.

Also, Imperial Knights themselves can do quite a lot even before you factor in the opposing army. 5 ObSec SHW will be able to out-score a lot of armies, Scatbike spam amongst them.

I'll admit they need some ignores cover, but thats about all they're missing at the current points cost.

Martel732 wrote:
Nope. There are too many weapons they are straight up immune to. I have to pack an inordinate amount of melta in my lists just because these things exist. They should actually be a bit flimsier, I think. And their weapons need nerfed a bit, too.

They're friggin' mini Titans. What do you expect?

 Yack Maniels wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Nope. There are too many weapons they are straight up immune to. I have to pack an inordinate amount of melta in my lists just because these things exist. They should actually be a bit flimsier, I think. And their weapons need nerfed a bit, too.

They're friggin' mini Titans. What do you expect?

Like every other vehicle/walker in 40K, I expect them to be junk, of course.

I don't get why some Knights are Gargantuan Monstrous Creatures and others are Superheavies. That kind of disparity (plus the obvious point difference) is really what makes it more difficult to compare two things that should be much closer in value and effectiveness.

Having just started my Eldar, I'm a little wary of getting a WK at all. The price is offputting enough, but the hate just puts it over the edge a little.

Imperial Knights are even more expensive, and though I'm out of the loop which is my own fault I have no idea how many books I need to run one. At least one $60 Codex, right? Is the newer Codex: Imperial Knights required as well, or did they literally update their book after a fething year?? Lol

 Lord Corellia wrote:
I don't get why some Knights are Gargantuan Monstrous Creatures and others are Superheavies. That kind of disparity (plus the obvious point difference) is really what makes it more difficult to compare two things that should be much closer in value and effectiveness.

Having just started my Eldar, I'm a little wary of getting a WK at all. The price is offputting enough, but the hate just puts it over the edge a little.

Imperial Knights are even more expensive, and though I'm out of the loop which is my own fault I have no idea how many books I need to run one. At least one $60 Codex, right? Is the newer Codex: Imperial Knights required as well, or did they literally update their book after a fething year?? Lol

Get a WK. Everyone else has them. People are getting used to the stompings. At least where I play, acceptance of inferiority is setting in.

The nwer knight codex allows some new formations, some relics, a better warlord trait table, detachments to take just knights, and three new knight types over the previous one

How about instead of buffing them:

"In any game other than Apocalypse your primary detachment may not be an Imperial Knight detachment"

 master of ordinance wrote:
How about instead of buffing them:

"In any game other than Apocalypse your primary detachment may not be an Imperial Knight detachment"

T'would solve the problem, but then GW has yet another non-army that you have to put tonnes of money into to get anything out of it.

 Selym wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:
How about instead of buffing them:

"In any game other than Apocalypse your primary detachment may not be an Imperial Knight detachment"

T'would solve the problem, but then GW has yet another non-army that you have to put tonnes of money into to get anything out of it.

How does this solve the problem at all? I don't see any problem with an all knight army and I also don't see any problem with the rock paper scissor mechanic of playing that army. This issue isn't that Knights have an all rock army and there too much paper. It's that some factions get little rocks while others get huge ones for less points. If I pay 400pts for a knight, it shouldn't be as easy as strapping some meltas to a squad to deal with it. If you disagree with the army as a whole then thats one thing, but it exists and is playable and supported by GW so in my mind, the problem is that it should be able to hold up under more pressure as a single force. Whether thats an issue with knights or the abundance of antiarmour weapons or WKs, idk. Maybe a little of all three, but in the end, I don't want to win any game or smash other players into the ground. I just think a tank should be a tank, and right now in 40k, it's not. It's more like a tin can that just take a little coaxing to open. At 400pts a piece and the ability to field them as a whole army, I just think they should be a little more survivable.

I look at it this way, if 40k were real, you be insane to put yourself in any armoured vehicle. You may as well be signing your own death warrant. You'd never go near them. That's just not the way it should be. As a wargamer, I like tanks and armour. So sue me. I just think they should act on the table like a freakin armoured vehicle as opposed to a corpse-mobile. The issue isn't only knights, but probably armour in general.

" a freakin armoured vehicle as opposed to a corpse-mobile. '

It's still so much better than 2nd ed.

 Dramagod2 wrote:
I look at it this way, if 40k were real, you be insane to put yourself in any armoured vehicle. You may as well be signing your own death warrant. You'd never go near them. That's just not the way it should be. As a wargamer, I like tanks and armour. So sue me. I just think they should act on the table like a freakin armoured vehicle as opposed to a corpse-mobile. The issue isn't only knights, but probably armour in general.

In real life you ARE insane to put yourself in an armoured vehicle. IF you're a lone tank or group of tanks with no support, that is. A million-dollar tank can be taken out by a $6 LAW by someone with as much training as it takes them to point it in the right direction.

BUT, first they have to get to the tank and then they have to make that lucky shot to kill it. Infantry either on foot or riding alongside in an APC go a long way to helping ensure that LAW doesn't get where it needs to be. Even then, sometimes it will.

 Dramagod2 wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:
How about instead of buffing them:

"In any game other than Apocalypse your primary detachment may not be an Imperial Knight detachment"

T'would solve the problem, but then GW has yet another non-army that you have to put tonnes of money into to get anything out of it.

How does this solve the problem at all? I don't see any problem with an all knight army and I also don't see any problem with the rock paper scissor mechanic of playing that army. This issue isn't that Knights have an all rock army and there too much paper. It's that some factions get little rocks while others get huge ones for less points. If I pay 400pts for a knight, it shouldn't be as easy as strapping some meltas to a squad to deal with it. If you disagree with the army as a whole then thats one thing, but it exists and is playable and supported by GW so in my mind, the problem is that it should be able to hold up under more pressure as a single force. Whether thats an issue with knights or the abundance of antiarmour weapons or WKs, idk. Maybe a little of all three, but in the end, I don't want to win any game or smash other players into the ground. I just think a tank should be a tank, and right now in 40k, it's not. It's more like a tin can that just take a little coaxing to open. At 400pts a piece and the ability to field them as a whole army, I just think they should be a little more survivable.

I look at it this way, if 40k were real, you be insane to put yourself in any armoured vehicle. You may as well be signing your own death warrant. You'd never go near them. That's just not the way it should be. As a wargamer, I like tanks and armour. So sue me. I just think they should act on the table like a freakin armoured vehicle as opposed to a corpse-mobile. The issue isn't only knights, but probably armour in general.

Just to remind you here that a Baneblade is 500... Or 550 if you are stupid enough to go by the Escalation variant. And it is no where near as good as even a single Knight.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
BTW, I too have an issue with how vehicles and the like are handled within this game. They feel weak and pathetic and right now and virtually useless in most cases. Trust me, as an Imperial Guard player I feel this more than anyone else out there.

The HP system needs to go. We need to have proper damage tables which reflect real life - Glancing should not kill a tank. Penetrating should kill it 50% of the time.

Still does not stop those Knights being what they are though.

 Dramagod2 wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:
How about instead of buffing them:

"In any game other than Apocalypse your primary detachment may not be an Imperial Knight detachment"

T'would solve the problem, but then GW has yet another non-army that you have to put tonnes of money into to get anything out of it.

How does this solve the problem at all? I don't see any problem with an all knight army and I also don't see any problem with the rock paper scissor mechanic of playing that army. This issue isn't that Knights have an all rock army and there too much paper. It's that some factions get little rocks while others get huge ones for less points. If I pay 400pts for a knight, it shouldn't be as easy as strapping some meltas to a squad to deal with it. If you disagree with the army as a whole then thats one thing, but it exists and is playable and supported by GW so in my mind, the problem is that it should be able to hold up under more pressure as a single force. Whether thats an issue with knights or the abundance of antiarmour weapons or WKs, idk. Maybe a little of all three, but in the end, I don't want to win any game or smash other players into the ground. I just think a tank should be a tank, and right now in 40k, it's not. It's more like a tin can that just take a little coaxing to open. At 400pts a piece and the ability to field them as a whole army, I just think they should be a little more survivable.

I look at it this way, if 40k were real, you be insane to put yourself in any armoured vehicle. You may as well be signing your own death warrant. You'd never go near them. That's just not the way it should be. As a wargamer, I like tanks and armour. So sue me. I just think they should act on the table like a freakin armoured vehicle as opposed to a corpse-mobile. The issue isn't only knights, but probably armour in general.

Knights are an upper-mid to low-high tier unit. The only things that they are weak against are tailored lists or Eldar.

Both of which shouldn't happen.

How do we begin to fix the imbalance of MC>vehicles?

I propose the elimination of glancing altogether. You only lose hull points when armor is penetrated. That alone will make vehicles more advantageous by nullifing haywire and making armorbane nessacary. If that is too broken for regular vehicles then reserve this suggestion for SHV because a SHV should not be brought down by weak guns.

 Selym wrote:
Knights are an upper-mid to low-high tier unit. The only things that they are weak against are tailored lists or Eldar.

Gathered tournament statistics show Imperial Knight armies ranking higher than any other army, including Eldar, in a performance by population.

 Filch wrote:
How do we begin to fix the imbalance of MC>vehicles?

Remove the distinction altogether.

Have one unit type to cover all large 'things', that would have been covered by the old vehicle and MC rules. Call it constructs or something. Then have a USR called Biological and another Mechanical to cover the differences in how certain weapon types affect them (Poison doesn't affect Mechanical, Haywire doesn't affect Biologial, so on).

One unit type is easier to learn, apply on the table, balance, and also helps smooth over fluff/logic inconsistencies with things like Riptides or other mechanical constructs that use MC rules.

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 Selym wrote:
Knights are an upper-mid to low-high tier unit. The only things that they are weak against are tailored lists or Eldar.

Gathered tournament statistics show Imperial Knight armies ranking higher than any other army, including Eldar, in a performance by population.

That is because they are allied in or using less than 5. Can you show me the statistics that accurately represent Pure IK armies?

 Selym wrote:
Gathered tournament statistics show Imperial Knight armies ranking higher than any other army, including Eldar, in a performance by population.

The stats I've seen posted were all from pre-Necron events. Therefore rendering them obsolete.

 Filch wrote:
That is because they are allied in or using less than 5. Can you show me the statistics that accurately represent Pure IK armies?

Why the hell should Imperial Knights be an army in its own right though? Honestly, it should be a LoW choice in every Imperial Codex. Maybe a 0-2 Heavy Support choice for a few of them.

If Morkanauts, Gorkanauts and Stompas were any good, would people expect them to be in a special snowflake "Da Meks" Codex? I mean sure, GW would be jerking themselves off at the thought of being able to sell another overpriced* $70 book, but that doesn't make it logical.


*GW's Codexes are overpriced, I don't care how much colour is in them or that they're hardback. Take a look at any of the NLC Lord of The Rings/ The Hobbit behind the scenes books; nicer quality, more licensees to slice up the pie between and $20-30 cheaper. Not to mention the fact that 90% of them isn't gak recycled from the past 25+ years of books.

When I Play my 5 IK I imagine them to be the Pacific Rim team of Jeagers. They are slow yet very fortified and immensely stong. Each step must be placed methodically and each punch is placed strategically. The Kaiju are quick and resiliently tough with hard scales and keen instinctual and animalistic ferocity and finesse.

Although 2 of the 4 Jeagers get brutally butchered by the tag team of kaiju, the single Jeager pulls theough and saves the last Jeager. That is why I made an army of IK. That aspect really appealed to me. Also moving and setting up and putting away 5 giant models as opposed to moving my 80 cultists and several marines and obliterators really appealed to me.

Daemon MC and tyranid MC fall into the traditional MC classification. Riptides, Wraith Lords and Wraith Knights are not traditional MC. They Leverage an unfair Advantage by getting Access to long range guns and fighting at high WS and Initiative and invul saves. Also they dont explode or get glanced.

My attitude is that Riptides and Wraith Knights should be classified as Walkers. That is a losing argument anyways as GW will never reclassify them as walkers.

 Filch wrote:
When I Play my 5 IK I imagine them to be the Pacific Rim team of Jeagers. They are slow yet very fortified and immensely stong. Each step must be placed methodically and each punch is placed strategically. The Kaiju are quick and resiliently tough with hard scales and keen instinctual and animalistic ferocity and finesse.

Although 2 of the 4 Jeagers get brutally butchered by the tag team of kaiju, the single Jeager pulls theough and saves the last Jeager. That is why I made an army of IK. That aspect really appealed to me. Also moving and setting up and putting away 5 giant models as opposed to moving my 80 cultists and several marines and obliterators really appealed to me.

Daemon MC and tyranid MC fall into the traditional MC classification. Riptides, Wraith Lords and Wraith Knights are not traditional MC. They Leverage an unfair Advantage by getting Access to long range guns and fighting at high WS and Initiative and invul saves.

My attitude is that Riptides and Wraith Knights should be classified as Walkers. That is a losing argument anyways as GW will never reclassify them as walkers.

Except the Jaegers forgot to bring ranged weapons for the most part. WKs didn't make that mistake.

Real world Pacific Rim.

Mr. President, the kaiju is attacking California!

President : Fire a nuke...

next day in head lines.

Kaiju killed by atomic bomb. California suffers radiation.

end of movie.

 Filch wrote:
Real world Pacific Rim.

Mr. President, the kaiju is attacking California!

President : Fire a nuke...

next day in head lines.

Kaiju killed by atomic bomb. California suffers radiation.

end of movie.

Actually thermobarics would probably work okay. And the navy has railguns now.

Metal Gear Rex had a rail gun and was smaller than an IK i think.

but anyways.

I would like to see a IK upgrade to negate glances or ceramite armor or special armor that turns Str D rolls of 2s-5s into 1 hp removal and 6s into d3 hp removal. These special armor upgrades can not be combined.






Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:

 Filch wrote:
Real world Pacific Rim.

Mr. President, the kaiju is attacking California!

President : Fire a nuke...

next day in head lines.

Kaiju killed by atomic bomb. California suffers radiation.

end of movie.

Actually thermobarics would probably work okay. And the navy has railguns now.

Have you seen the horrible movie Battle Ships?

The primary benefit gargantuan mc's have is near immunity to their counter weapons systems and the ability to gain cover from simply being in terrain. I eliminated those bonuses from my home games and made the superheavies take a modified vehicle damage chart.

Now neither is so strong as to make the opponent's units obsolete.

(Also tacked 100 points even onto the wraithknight and moded strD a bit)

 Filch wrote:
How do we begin to fix the imbalance of MC>vehicles?

I propose the elimination of glancing altogether. You only lose hull points when armor is penetrated. That alone will make vehicles more advantageous by nullifing haywire and making armorbane nessacary. If that is too broken for regular vehicles then reserve this suggestion for SHV because a SHV should not be brought down by weak guns.

What happens to Gauss, then?

Auto-pen? Seems like something GW would do in response.

 Filch wrote:
How do we begin to fix the imbalance of MC>vehicles?

May I suggest using the updated vehicle and monstrous creature design rules linked in my signature? You can use it to figure out an appropriate armor value rating based on point value.

For example, a wraithknight's survivability is comparable to av 13-13-12, a riptide's 11-11-11. You would still gain the ability to pen them to damage, but they would become immune to lower ap weapons, fleshbane, and poison without adding a special ability to them saying otherwise.

Just thought I'd throw that out there

 Selym wrote:

 Filch wrote:
How do we begin to fix the imbalance of MC>vehicles?

I propose the elimination of glancing altogether. You only lose hull points when armor is penetrated. That alone will make vehicles more advantageous by nullifing haywire and making armorbane nessacary. If that is too broken for regular vehicles then reserve this suggestion for SHV because a SHV should not be brought down by weak guns.

What happens to Gauss, then?

Auto-pen? Seems like something GW would do in response.

Good question. Ok I reject my suggestion.

What about an upgrade that requires 2 glances to count as 1 glance?

Filch, I noticed you literally built your first Knight twenty days ago. Is that right?

It's way too soon to be doing anything but learning how to play your list. Don't forget, most players already have a lot of experience already against IKs. You are still learning basic tactics. So no wonder you're getting stomped. Read this, it will probably help you. https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2015/05/31/imperial-knights-7e-making-a-knight-primary-army/

When facing enemies wielding Destroyer melee weapons, do not charge them if you aren’t going to be going first. Instead, position yourself to receive the charge where the enemy will be forced to charge you through cover, as it currently stands, nothing that has a Destroyer melee weapon has assault grenades.

They need to be av14 fronts with av13 sides and av12 back. A 3+ invulnerable stock with ways to make it 2+ on specific knights. They need more weapons. The cannon should be ordance 4. Drop in price roughly 35 points for each knight. These are just a few musts

 Filch wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 Filch wrote:
How do we begin to fix the imbalance of MC>vehicles?

I propose the elimination of glancing altogether. You only lose hull points when armor is penetrated. That alone will make vehicles more advantageous by nullifing haywire and making armorbane nessacary. If that is too broken for regular vehicles then reserve this suggestion for SHV because a SHV should not be brought down by weak guns.

What happens to Gauss, then?

Auto-pen? Seems like something GW would do in response.

Good question. Ok I reject my suggestion.

What about an upgrade that requires 2 glances to count as 1 glance?

Nah, just double up on Hull Points.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
They need to be av14 fronts with av13 sides and av12 back. A 3+ invulnerable stock with ways to make it 2+ on specific knights. They need more weapons. The cannon should be ordance 4. Drop in price roughly 35 points for each knight. These are just a few musts

Hah?
Baneblades at 500-600 points a pop have less defence and offence than that.

I can tell you're serious, because it's still possible to one-shot the Knight with a D-Weapon. Not fair. I propose that each Knight should come with a free retinue of 2 Warhound Titans, who can roll "Look Out Sir" for their Knight on a 2+.

To keep things balanced, the Warhound Titans are not ObSec

nvm

Lol!

Treated by Yoyoyo! Learn to Play he says. I clicked the link to lurnz!

I was whooping butt til I ran into a list with 2 WK.

Yet more reason to /not/ buff IK.

Yoyoyo wrote:
I can tell you're serious, because it's still possible to one-shot the Knight with a D-Weapon. Not fair. I propose that each Knight should come with a free retinue of 2 Warhound Titans, who can roll "Look Out Sir" for their Knight on a 2+.

To keep things balanced, the Warhound Titans are not ObSec

...IK are the smallest SHV. The Warhound Titan is much bigger I believe. Makes no sense for Warhound titans to be retinue for IK.

It does, you see, because IK are so perfect in the fluff, it makes sense that they should get really big bodyguards.
And we have in-game evidence that proves that both units are practically useless on their own, so they need to be put together. That way the Eldar won't be the most powerful thing ever.

IOM: 1
Eldar: 0

Lols the troll is strong in this one.

Happy to please

 Filch wrote:
Lol! I was whooping butt til I ran into a list with 2 WK.

Don't worry Filch I have your back. Here is an email from GW, I told them about your issues and it looks like they came through right away. You're a lucky guy.
----------------------------

Dear valued customer,

We at Games Workshop have been greatly dismayed to learn about your recent unfortunate experiences regarding the new Eldar Wraithknight. While we've been excited to introduce epic battles between superheavies and gargantuan creatures into the world of Warhammer 40,000, we never intended that two Wraithknights could defeat an army of five Imperial Knights! The entire Warhammer 40,000 design team and our CEO, Tom Kirby, would like to personally extend their sincere and heartfelt apologies for this tragic oversight on our part. A FAQ correcting these regrettable errors in game balance will be out in the near future.

Until this time, please feel free to take 2 Warhound Titans, for whom rules are available in the Warhammer 40,000: Apocalypse book, as a bodyguard to protect an Imperial Knight when it finds itself threatened by devious Eldar forces. These bodyguards should be considered a free Retinue and are reflected in the points cost of the corresponding Imperial Knight. On a roll of 2+ ("Look out, Sir!"), any glance or penetrating hit can be assigned from an Imperial Knight, to a Warhound Titan belonging to that Knight's Retinue. Please note that the Retinue itself is not Objective Secure. You can find Warhammer 40,000: Apocalypse and Warhound Titan models available on our webstore, or you may place a special order at your nearest Games Workshop retailer.

To any Warhammer 40,000 players who may read this email in the future, please note that it is 100% authentic, in no way should be construed as a joke, and anyone found in non-compliance may be threatened with legal action and disqualification from future GW events.

Yours sincerely,
Games Workshop Customer Service

I'm not 100% sure, but I *think* I smell a troll...

Shush! There's absolutely no reason to be suspicious

No, I shall stay suspicios

Good Troll: One who leaves bystanders unsure if trolling or not.

Trolololol yoyoyo

On a more serious note though, It does seem as though anti armour is everywhere now. Melta is all over the place. I know that knights are strong and maybe Im naive to use the "B" word but it just feels like a lack of balance. Dreadnaughts are another great example of a unit that should be awesome or at least worth fielding, yet just doesn't seem to live up to it's purported reputation on the table top.

 Dramagod2 wrote:
On a more serious note though, It does seem as though anti armour is everywhere now. Melta is all over the place. I know that knights are strong and maybe Im naive to use the "B" word but it just feels like a lack of balance. Dreadnaughts are another great example of a unit that should be awesome or at least worth fielding, yet just doesn't seem to live up to it's purported reputation on the table top.

You've yet to see two of them arrive in Drop Pods behind a gunline
One of the meanest things you can do is equip them with a Heavy Flamer, an Assault Cannon and a DCCW, and they can wreck infantry and tanks alike. I speak from experience as both the giver and the reciever.

maybe a one hull point increase but really they are pretty op as is. the armour is accurately represented and as of the new codex they can handle anything. everyone says packing melta brings down knights pretty quick, but realistically, do you really want to be that close to something that goes big boom, or then having to deal with a very annoyed super heavy walker that you failed to kill.

D strength chainswords and being able to punt your opponents vehicles. Priceless