I currently have 1000 points of Grey knights (Librarian, three squads of Terminators and a Dreadknight). I'm doing really well with them, but like the idea of adding in an Imperial Knight Crusader for some long range firepower, something the Grey Knights really lack - plus the model looks really cool.

At what points cost is having a Knight ally acceptable? Adding him to my 1000 points to make a 1500 point army, or wait until I have 1500 and add him to make it 2000?

I don't play competitively, and enjoy casual games with a large group of semi-regular opponents, and certainly don't want to put people off playing me or make them think I'm being cheesy.

Any advice would be great! Thanks

Hard question to answer as many people will have differing opinions, and it's really an opinion based answer. I'd say a knight is reasonable in a list over 1000 points.

Superheavies belong in Apoc.

I personally don't think superheavies should be used at anything below 1850-2000 (and even then don't like to play with them), but (against me anyways) it's no huge deal if you want to use it at 1500.

What sort of people are you playing against, how do you fare, does anyone else use superheavies, do people have ways of dealing with them, how are you defining "casual", have you asked any of them "Hey, what do you think of superheavies? I think they're cool and was thinking about getting a knight, was curious if you guys would be fine playing against one?".

It varies between all groups, I know people that think a gladius is casual, where others think anything that isn't footslogging tacticals is cheese. You know these people better than I do, and you know your meta better than I do, so it's hard for me to outright say what will work best for you. I say yeah, it's fine, but YMMV.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Superheavies belong in Apoc.

Knights don't perform like a real superheavy. They are about on par with an MC in terms of durability.

Martel732 wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Superheavies belong in Apoc.

Knights don't perform like a real superheavy. They are about on par with an MC in terms of durability.

little better then that but ultimately I think IKs are balanced for the points you pay.

fact is apolclypse doesn't really exist anymore. in terms of when to use or not use an IK, I'd say it depends really. IMHO a single IK in a force of GKs should be fine in just about any game over 700 points. if your opponent can't crack the IK, chances are he'd have trouble cracking a land raider or two (something you could take a fair number of as a GK player)

Martel732 wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Superheavies belong in Apoc.

Knights don't perform like a real superheavy. They are about on par with an MC in terms of durability.

One Super Heavy stays, they all stay.

Okay, just saying.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Superheavies belong in Apoc.

Knights don't perform like a real superheavy. They are about on par with an MC in terms of durability.

One Super Heavy stays, they all stay.

this BTW is why asking on dakkadakka isn't really worth your time, discuss it with your regular opponents. views on IKs vary, and some partiuclarly conservitive people can't get past that it's a super heavy

Cower before my AV 12 sides! And my ability to absorb 1/5th of the firepower that a Riptide can!

As said in larger games like 1850 pts a superheavy like an IK is acceptable.
Please have a look into the Lanchester square law. Double armor requires fourfold fire power to take it down.

Martel732 wrote:
Cower before my AV 12 sides! And my ability to absorb 1/5th of the firepower that a Riptide can!

I'm all about equality. If people have to cower before the Imperial Knight they can just as easily cower before a Wraith Knight.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Cower before my AV 12 sides! And my ability to absorb 1/5th of the firepower that a Riptide can!

I'm all about equality. If people have to cower before the Imperial Knight they can just as easily cower before a Wraith Knight.

the big differance between the two is the IK isn't criminally under costed

I was being sarcastic. Bring all the IKs you want. They're kinda junky in the scheme of things. They cost way too much to have AV 12 anything, much less on 3 out of 4 sides.

Martel732 wrote:
I was being sarcastic. Bring all the IKs you want. They're kinda junky in the scheme of things. They cost way too much to have AV 12 anything, much less on 3 out of 4 sides.

disagree with that they're solid units they're just not dramaticly OP. they're honestly pretty balanced for their points, hence my earlier comment about some people not being able to get over their "super heavy status"

BrianDavion wrote:
fact is apolclypse doesn't really exist anymore. in terms of when to use or not use an IK, I'd say it depends really. IMHO a single IK in a force of GKs should be fine in just about any game over 700 points. if your opponent can't crack the IK, chances are he'd have trouble cracking a land raider or two (something you could take a fair number of as a GK player)

To be fair, not every army can bring a lot of anti-armor to small games. Just thinking of my guard I need at least 170 points and good rolls (thinking a manticore, which I normally don't take in small games) to take out a knight, taking 4 turns. Otherwise it's at least 2 squads of meltavets which is about 400 points, and if it's a dakkaknight I'll have trouble getting into melta range. I pay out the butt for lascannons as they're either on expense and squishy HWS or one per 10 man squad. Again, at large points values it's fine because I'll have 3 squads of meltavets and a manticore and russes and lascannons but at 1000 I can't always put half my list into purely anti-tank options.

Comparing a knight to a LR isn't always a good idea either, as while they're tough their shooting is generally mediocre, have the damage table (including exploding to a single shot), and only pose a melee threat if you buy another expensive unit to put inside (note that this unit doesn't have a D weapon or stomps). Which, once it kills through the original target, gets mowed down immediately by everything that can't hurt a knight. I can pop a land raider with a single melta bomb or a single melta shot or 2-3 rounds from my manticore instead of using all 4 missiles (forcing damage results every turn).

1000 is just too unlikely to have a balanced list for everything, especially if you're in a casual meta where people aren't always taking a minmaxed list with no fat around the edges.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Cower before my AV 12 sides! And my ability to absorb 1/5th of the firepower that a Riptide can!

I'm all about equality. If people have to cower before the Imperial Knight they can just as easily cower before a Wraith Knight.

the big differance between the two is the IK isn't criminally under costed

The fairest way to be rid of them is to be rid of ALL of them.

Can we get rid of DKs and Riptides, too? Since, you know, they're better than most super heavies?

Martel732 wrote:
Can we get rid of DKs and Riptides, too? Since, you know, they're better than most super heavies?

and let's get rid of thunder wolf cavalry while we're at it, hell let's just remove everything but a tatical squad and rhinos!

Exactly. Superheavy is a relatively arbitrary designation that makes walkers functional and MCs obscene.

BrianDavion wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Can we get rid of DKs and Riptides, too? Since, you know, they're better than most super heavies?

and let's get rid of thunder wolf cavalry while we're at it, hell let's just remove everything but a tatical squad and rhinos!

Thunderwolves are amazing but not overcosted at all, they're like wraiths basically, quite durable but not immortal, fast, but lacking AP and high strenght attacks, they only rely on rending... grav spam is a real issue, more than DKs and riptides, those damn things should have a single shot. Also free vehicles are unacceptable.

Taking one IK in a 1500-1850 points game is fine, 1000 points of GK and an IK are far from being an invincible force.

BrianDavion wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Can we get rid of DKs and Riptides, too? Since, you know, they're better than most super heavies?

and let's get rid of thunder wolf cavalry while we're at it, hell let's just remove everything but a tatical squad and rhinos!

Martel would be all for that, it's all his Blood Angels have.

Personally I like to harken back to the days of not being allowed to take special characters in games under 1500 pts. As such, ID be happy to field or go up against a knight in games of 1500+. Anything less than that just doesn't look right on the field to me.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Can we get rid of DKs and Riptides, too? Since, you know, they're better than most super heavies?

and let's get rid of thunder wolf cavalry while we're at it, hell let's just remove everything but a tatical squad and rhinos!

Martel would be all for that, it's all his Blood Angels have.

Not really. At any rate, anyone who thinks IKs are not fair around 1250 or 1000 better hope they don't see Riptides, either. Same problem, but 5X worse.

Martel732 wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Can we get rid of DKs and Riptides, too? Since, you know, they're better than most super heavies?

and let's get rid of thunder wolf cavalry while we're at it, hell let's just remove everything but a tatical squad and rhinos!

Martel would be all for that, it's all his Blood Angels have.

Not really. At any rate, anyone who thinks IKs are not fair around 1250 or 1000 better hope they don't see Riptides, either. Same problem, but 5X worse.

It isn't all they have or it wouldn't make you happy.
I know happiness isn't a particularly natural state for you...

In my opinion, it honestly depends. 40k is so unbalanced that it could vary depending who you are playing. Discuss it with your opponents. As long as they have something to deal with it, it might be fair game. What if they bring a Riptide, or a Wraithknight too? etc. etc.

The point is that you can kill IKs with damn autocannons pretty readily. Rapidly even if they are outflanking. They are super fragile for a 400 pt model.

"It isn't all they have or it wouldn't make you happy. "

Both. I don't mind people having their toys, they just need to cost an appropriate amount.

If it hasn't been made clear already by the bickering, Dakkadakka is not the place to get a useful answer to your question.

Ask your normal opponents, see what they think. They're the ones you'll need to play against, not Dakka Wolf, not me, and not any other dakkadakka user.

At the end of the day it's down to your local group as to what they will find fair.

Me personally, I have no issues with them.
Throw one in a 1k list for all I care.
If you can't kill a knight then your army has severe issues and most people are going to beat you.

If it happened to be 14/14/14 then it would be a pain, but it's flimsy, 6HP and easily killed.

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
If it hasn't been made clear already by the bickering, Dakkadakka is not the place to get a useful answer to your question.

Ask your normal opponents, see what they think. They're the ones you'll need to play against, not Dakka Wolf, not me, and not any other dakkadakka user.

It's a question of the local meta which only you can answer. Do your opponents bring regularly superheavies like a WK?
In the tournament scene you will see superheavies at a regular basis.

Never?

All going to depend on your opponent.

At 1,500 points, your foe may lack the firepower or hittiness to threaten your Knight before it's smashed up his lines.

It's not just that they're tough, but depending on equipment they can do over four units a turn. Let's take the Crusader. Battlecannon gets two S8 AP3 pie plates - there's not a lot that can't knock a hole in. Gatling Cannon - not as universally useful, but can do horrible things to side armour. Rocket Pod up top - can either bother infantry, or threaten light-medium tanks if you go with the Krak version. Heavy Stubber? OK, that probably won't be killing much. So you instead use it for desultory fire on a unit you're wanting to charge.

That's a really commanding presence in such small games - and may be too much for your opponent to deal with and still have a fun game.

I'd suggest getting it anyway, because you like the models - that's reason enough. But, when you want to field it, pack two lists - one with, one without. If your opponent really objects, you can work round it with minimal fuss.

Pretty much any time at 1500 or higher. Probably go to 2 maximum at 2000 then 2500+ is anything goes anyway usually.

Dok - keep in mind bud that a knight with that layout won't be cheap.
You could easily replace it with the Russ or its variants to have more effect for less cost.

A lot of armies can run things that cause the same damage, if not more for a lot less points.
Some of which are more survivable too.

If someone lacks the firepower to kill a knight then they can't handle most armoured vehicles either.

As I said earlier, if it had higher armour then I could see the issue, but it's fairly low armoured.

I typically bring one every time I go out to play, but I will only field it in a 2000 point game unless the other person brings one in a lower point match. We had a WWE Knight off one game and it was hilarious. The knights were only allowed to combat each other until one died.

Otherwise I keep it in reserve for the resident Necron cheese player (this guy just can't make a list that doesn't have 4 C'tan and his monolith. AND his tesseract vault). Or the Tau guy that frequently has been bringing a riptide wing and a stormsurge to 1500 points.

I bring a Knight to balance power. I play Sisters of Battle and don't run the singular competitve list, so a Knight can easily balance out the rest of my girls without being too good.

When you're playing a 1,500-2,000pt game with an army that needs the help (...GK, for instance...) a Knight is fine. Knights don't usually become an issue unless you're trying to field a lot of them.

Honestly never, super heavies and GMC's should not be in sub 2k games. They were designed to appear in apoc games not standard games. I have discoved that what happened is who ever was making 7th really liked apoc and said lets make that the template for the rest of the game.

The issue is super heavies can wipe out a whole squad in a single round of shooting or more. In apoc, not a big deal i still have a crap ton of guys, in sub 2k, not so much.

A battle cannon does the same to a unit of tyranid warriors, what's the difference?

The topic is specific to knights, not all superheavies.
You can build the equivalent in a knights shooting abilities through most armies units for the same cost or less.

This isn't about huge constructions dropping D templates everywhere, just knights.



Now a serious question for anyone (related to the topic)
Would your army be capable of destroying a unit of 3 leman russ?

Most balanced 1,500 point lists should be able to deal with a single knight. At that level, it’s not unreasonable.

While in general I’d prefer that stuff of that ilk stayed in apoc games, we are where we are. And there are far more unreasonable things you can do at this point then a single knight. I’d rather face a IK then an invisible deathstar, or some re-rolling invulnerable thing.

IKs are actually fairly costed for what they bring. Sure, they are mean, but you pay for it. My only real issue with them is if they are spammed. Then the game is just rock/paper/scissors. No amount of AV in a TAC list can deal with that, so the only option is playing another skew list, which I dislike.

You don't need AV to kill IKs, so TAC lists do just fine. The popular anti-infantry weapons of 7th ed glance them out just fine.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Superheavies belong in Apoc.

This

It is always okay to use an Imperial Knight!
Crush those heretics beneath your iron boots and grind their bones to dust!

But, to be honest. You can play with an Imperial Knight at almost any point level.
They are quite balanced and if you tell your opponent that you will use one (or more) then they can tailor their list to it.
Pretty much every army has something to counter Knights with.

I am playing in a small campaign tournament at the moment (500pts), while taking a Knight Gallant with the Skitarii Ironstrider Cavaliers formation.
It is a fun and a very melee heavy list and I have yet to encounter an opponent who was like: "Oh no, a Knight. I forfeit".
Most people find it a ton of fun to try and evade the towering monstrosity while picking up objectives.

Martel732 wrote:
At any rate, anyone who thinks IKs are not fair around 1250 or 1000 better hope they don't see Riptides, either. Same problem, but 5X worse.

speaking for myself, I no longer own a riptide...
...but I just got my second stormsurge.

 carldooley wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
At any rate, anyone who thinks IKs are not fair around 1250 or 1000 better hope they don't see Riptides, either. Same problem, but 5X worse.

speaking for myself, I no longer own a riptide...
...but I just got my second stormsurge.

Which is actually less durable and far less durable/pt. The Stormsurge is very strong, but it isn't as hair-pulling obscene as the Riptide.

One major thing to consider is that as points scale down, the battlefield scales up.

It's a lot easier to maneuver around very hard targets on a 6' x 4' board when you only have 1000 points each.

In that sense, and since the IK isn't that bad, I'd say 1500 is more than enough.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Superheavies belong in Apoc.

This. Agree 100%. Knights and superheavies do not belong in "regular" 40K.

Regular 40k includes knights now and superheavies.
This is part of 7th edition.

Not sure if it's just me, but I really have no issue facing any superheavies atall.
It's part of the game.

Never seen someone turn down a game because of one either.


If it's a friendly game and your running 2+ then by all means, warn whoever your facing.
In a competitive environment, expect to see them every game.

Most recent tournament I attended had 2 people running a hound at 2k.
Both armies didn't make the top 3.


The only time I'd see an issue is if you expect to foot slog the entire table and actually make it there alive.
In which case, I have no sympathy atall.

Also, completely forgot about Stomp.

A favourable roll on that can see your Knight demolish the enemy - including units it's not actually in combat with, and your opponent thought we safe.

Yes, LoW are absolutely part of 40k these days, and there's no point kvetching about that.

But so is Sportsmanship. Some opponent will enjoy the challenge a Knight poses. Others might feel completely unequipped to deal with it (for instance, Tyranids can have a sod of a time - any unit held in 'back up' to counter charge the Knight risks being Stomped, and possibly removed from play).

Hence my two list suggestion.

I'd say ask your local opponents, it's up to them. You're seeing casual players here as well as competitive, that's why your getting a range from "NO!" to "any point level is fine".

Again, ask the people you play with. If we play together and I don't want to play against knights and you bring one without asking me first, I'm likely not playing you again unless we're already good friends. I'd also suggest that if they are nervous, talk with them about how to handle the knight. Maybe even go through scenarios, including the dice rolls, to show them how to deal with it! For example, if they're SM, what happens when you drop pod a bunch(same point value as the knight) of sternguard with meltas behind them? How many rounds of lascannon shooting to get through the shield and kill it?

To be fair, nids do suffer unless your running TL dev flyrants.
In which case you mock the knight before emptying into it.

Although thropes and hive guard also tend to put a ton of damage on them pretty easily.
They just are nowhere near as safe from it.


But that's a far cry from eldar sitting back and glancing it to death or crons doing the same, so I see your point there bud.

In casual play, if your list is nice and mixed, a knight fits in great. They are only problematic when your list is JUST Knights.

Iknights are very "okay" when the list isn't built around abusing them, similar to Magnus the red. When the list is built to competitively abuse them, games become uneven.

lol so a knight is off limits to some, land raiders, daemon princes, blood thirsters, riptides, etc are not?

A knight is AV 13 with 6 hp, it's ain't that hard to kill folks.

I use IKs as the world's most inefficient distraction carnifex. I don't see the problem with that, except for me.

 Jackal wrote:
Dok - keep in mind bud that a knight with that layout won't be cheap.
You could easily replace it with the Russ or its variants to have more effect for less cost.

A lot of armies can run things that cause the same damage, if not more for a lot less points.
Some of which are more survivable too.

If someone lacks the firepower to kill a knight then they can't handle most armoured vehicles either.

As I said earlier, if it had higher armour then I could see the issue, but it's fairly low armoured.

The difference between an IK (or any other superheavy vehicle) and say, other tanks such as Russes, Predators or Land Raiders is that you can immobilise and strip the weapons off normal vehicles. You can shake them and you can stun them which can hamper their firepower. And they can only fire at a single target. So you can stop them, strip away the weapons that threaten you or potentially hamper their firepower for a turn or two. If you can immobilise them and assault them they're generally easy pickings as well.

Superheavies?

Immune to Shaken and Stunned. Can't be immobilised. Can't destroy weapons.

Can fire at as many different targets as it has weapons. And if it's a walker? It gets a chance of D stomping all over units.

There's a difference between a player struggling to deal with a Leman Russ or two and having to deal with an IK. With the russes you can strip the threatening weapons off turning them into metal boxes or you can immobilise them and restrict their fields of fire. Hell, with an AP2 or AP1 weapon you can potentially destroy them outright.

A superheavy? That won't do much at all. Even rolling 'destroyed' results in D3 HP being lost.

Superheavies, GCs and D-weapons really have no place in 40k outside of Apocalypse to be honest.

Land Raiders are garbage...

 sfshilo wrote:
lol so a knight is off limits to some, land raiders, daemon princes, blood thirsters, riptides, etc are not?

A knight is AV 13 with 6 hp, it's ain't that hard to kill folks.

I can strip the weapons off a Land Raider with a weapon destroyed result. Can you strip the weapons off a Knight? No.
I can immobilse a Land Raider - heck, Grav Weapons can do it even easier. Can you immobilise a Knight? No.
I can destroy a Land Raider with a single lucky AP2 or AP1 penetrating hit. Can you destroy a Knight with a single hit? No.

An immobilsed Land Raider cannot threaten objectives with what it transports.
A Land Raider stripped of certain weapons cannot threaten certain units efficiently.
A destroyed Land Raider threatens nobody.

A Knight will always be able to move and what a distance it moves too. You cannot immobilise it in a bad spot, you cannot immobilise it to screw over its arc of fire.
A Knight will always have its weapons. It will never be hampered in firing them since it cannot be stunned or shaken and can target seperate units.
A Knight will take D3 HP from a destroyed result. If you're unlucky that equals 1. But it will still function at full capability.

If an army struggles with armour in general (Orks and Tyranids sort of have this as an inbuilt weakness, some armies only have short range anti-armour capabilities) then a Superheavy is a problem squared. Because even the conventional tactics of bogging down or stripping away threats doesn't work.

Stripping or immobilising the weapons of 3 russ but can't take 6 HP of a knight?
I don't see it, sorry.

You never remove the weapons or immobilise a vehicle then leave it as it's points sat there.
If your army can't remove 6 HP off AV13 (if for some reason you shoot the front of it) with the chance of doing 3 HP in 1 go then your army has a big issue.


While people are saying the should be apocalypse only units, this isn't 6th any more.
There are far more devastating units that can be taken that aren't super heavy, GC or use D weapons.

Considering what grav cents can do to any vehicle.
Riptides that ignore most shooting.
Flyrants which can be a sheer pain.
Scatterbikes for massed shooting.

None of the above fit the apocalypse criteria, yet all of them are far more effective in a list than a knight is.

 Jackal wrote:
Regular 40k includes knights now and superheavies.
This is part of 7th edition.

Not sure if it's just me, but I really have no issue facing any superheavies atall.
It's part of the game.

Was part of 6th too thanks to escalation, I believe it's a similar hold up to the "no forgeworld" mentality that's persisted since 4th at least; largely the units are overestimated because of the label of superheavy or forgeworld and the kneejerk reaction is to never adapt to it. Which is still fine if that's how you're group wants to play it, since neither side will have fun if they try to enforce their view of the game on the other; even though they should be fully prepared to face such things these days if they do decide to venture out of their bubble.

However things like wraithknights are a different thing all together; it's less the label and more the pricing there. But then there are things like that that don't even have the benefit of being gmc or superheavy. Which should be looked at more closely as well, yet are less feared due to not having these labels. Like, I'd actually be happier facing a knight than 400 points of scatterbikes.

First instinct is it is "always" ok if it is fully painted. (that is the painting "snob" speaking).
Second instinct is "When would it not be ok? It is ok according to the rules." (that is my competitive side speaking).
Third is "Why not take three or four??" (that is my jerk side that does not get out much).
Final say: I want a close game and for some reason, people are just not prepared for these things so I do not field them much. Shame really.

 don_mondo wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Superheavies belong in Apoc.

This. Agree 100%. Knights and superheavies do not belong in "regular" 40K.

Except Imperial Knights were written specifically for regular 40k

Only 1 IK at 1000pts? You can have 3 IKs at 1000pts!!!!!!!

SJ

 DarkStarSabre wrote:

 Jackal wrote:
Dok - keep in mind bud that a knight with that layout won't be cheap.
You could easily replace it with the Russ or its variants to have more effect for less cost.

A lot of armies can run things that cause the same damage, if not more for a lot less points.
Some of which are more survivable too.

If someone lacks the firepower to kill a knight then they can't handle most armoured vehicles either.

As I said earlier, if it had higher armour then I could see the issue, but it's fairly low armoured.

The difference between an IK (or any other superheavy vehicle) and say, other tanks such as Russes, Predators or Land Raiders is that you can immobilise and strip the weapons off normal vehicles. You can shake them and you can stun them which can hamper their firepower. And they can only fire at a single target. So you can stop them, strip away the weapons that threaten you or potentially hamper their firepower for a turn or two. If you can immobilise them and assault them they're generally easy pickings as well.

Superheavies?

Immune to Shaken and Stunned. Can't be immobilised. Can't destroy weapons.

Can fire at as many different targets as it has weapons. And if it's a walker? It gets a chance of D stomping all over units.

There's a difference between a player struggling to deal with a Leman Russ or two and having to deal with an IK. With the russes you can strip the threatening weapons off turning them into metal boxes or you can immobilise them and restrict their fields of fire. Hell, with an AP2 or AP1 weapon you can potentially destroy them outright.

A superheavy? That won't do much at all. Even rolling 'destroyed' results in D3 HP being lost.

Superheavies, GCs and D-weapons really have no place in 40k outside of Apocalypse to be honest.

Can't do any of that to an MC, either. You can't even get a D3 wound result vs a MC. Vehicles are junk. SHW are merely functional in a way that walkers should already be.

Whenever your opponent is cool with it.

The part that bothers me a bit is I like rules.
I like them even more if the function in a reasonable way.

It feels strange to discuss if it is ok to use a unit that is specifically included in the game for use.
It would be like saying you can never field a Tie-Defender in X-wing.
Or a Queen in chess since that model is way OP in the game compared to the other pieces.

I know now at this time 40k is more of a scenario sandbox RPG for playing out stories you may have heard of in the fluff.
The days of straight-out-of-the-rules-competitive-play is long over.

I do have to ask the question though: if the game is to be casual and extra rules of etiquette are tacked-on, why should you care if someone fields an IK?
They only wanted to have fun or they would not have fielded it.
It is a proud achievement to get one together, more so if painted: are you going to be TFG and tell them you will not play them because you do not like their model?
How "casual" is this game again?

Ok here is my biggest problem.

When you buy that one thing that you really want to use. Maybe it's just something silly like a Predator or a Dreadnought you painted up.

Then your opponent nukes it turn one.

You had been waiting to use that unit for weeks and the one game you get to play, it just dies.

This is why I hate OP formations and units. They can instantly ruin the game before it even begins.

As for the knight? As long as it isn't RUINING the game, I don't really care. I've fought knights before and they can be hell if you didn't prepare enough heavy weapons/haywire for all those hull points.

I know this rant was kinda off topic, but it's something that's always bothered me.

If someone sunk massive points into an IK i'd laugh while my Celestine cut it in half with 6 strength5 armourbane swings at I7.

 Whitebeard wrote:
Ok here is my biggest problem.

When you buy that one thing that you really want to use. Maybe it's just something silly like a Predator or a Dreadnought you painted up.

Then your opponent nukes it turn one.

You had been waiting to use that unit for weeks and the one game you get to play, it just dies.

This is why I hate OP formations and units. They can instantly ruin the game before it even begins.

As for the knight? As long as it isn't RUINING the game, I don't really care. I've fought knights before and they can be hell if you didn't prepare enough heavy weapons/haywire for all those hull points.

I know this rant was kinda off topic, but it's something that's always bothered me.

What does OP formations and units have to do with losing guys in one turn? I've lost guys in one turn to lucky Defiler shots, hardly OP

Again, vehicles are fragile junk. Expect them to die.

One knight in a 1500 point list is absolutely fine. They're really not that powerful.

I really don't get angst about the superheavies. As it has been pointed out, this game has things that are way more powerful than them. Our local tournament banned superheavies and gargantuans, and as I heard that I instantly knew how that tournament would go: Tau would roflstomp everything with their Riptides. And that's exactly what happened. It is completely absurd to ban things like Imperial Knights and Baneblades and allow Riptides which are way more powerful.

 Whitebeard wrote:
Ok here is my biggest problem.

When you buy that one thing that you really want to use. Maybe it's just something silly like a Predator or a Dreadnought you painted up.

Then your opponent nukes it turn one.

You had been waiting to use that unit for weeks and the one game you get to play, it just dies.

This is why I hate OP formations and units. They can instantly ruin the game before it even begins.

As for the knight? As long as it isn't RUINING the game, I don't really care. I've fought knights before and they can be hell if you didn't prepare enough heavy weapons/haywire for all those hull points.

I know this rant was kinda off topic, but it's something that's always bothered me.

So an op formation is the only thing that can melt a unit in one turn? How about a BA squad with 4 templates dropping on your shiny new infantry squad? Or your vehicle being one shot by a las cannon dev squad, drop podded sternguards, or single vindicare round? They are all OP because they can destroy something in one round of firing? How about when half the army shot at the new shiny unit killing it? If you don't want it dead, don't bring it.

Riptides are more durable vs anti-tank fire than a warhound TITAN. Think about that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 troa wrote:

 Whitebeard wrote:
Ok here is my biggest problem.

When you buy that one thing that you really want to use. Maybe it's just something silly like a Predator or a Dreadnought you painted up.

Then your opponent nukes it turn one.

You had been waiting to use that unit for weeks and the one game you get to play, it just dies.

This is why I hate OP formations and units. They can instantly ruin the game before it even begins.

As for the knight? As long as it isn't RUINING the game, I don't really care. I've fought knights before and they can be hell if you didn't prepare enough heavy weapons/haywire for all those hull points.

I know this rant was kinda off topic, but it's something that's always bothered me.

So an op formation is the only thing that can melt a unit in one turn? How about a BA squad with 4 templates dropping on your shiny new infantry squad? Or your vehicle being one shot by a las cannon dev squad, drop podded sternguards, or single vindicare round? They are all OP because they can destroy something in one round of firing? How about when half the army shot at the new shiny unit killing it? If you don't want it dead, don't bring it.

Everything i bring is expendable. Even my warlord, because BA have the noble sacrifice maelstrom card.

Martel has it spot on.
Armour in 7th may as well be glass.

If your running anything with an AV value then expect it to die.
A knight is no exception to this.

I'd expect even an average TAC list to be able to strip it's HP in a turn.


If your struggling to destroy AV then your list has issues and God help you if you face a gladius.

This is why I quit using razorbacks for the most part. I'm rocking whirlwinds (cheap and can hide), Rhinos (cheap and fast) and autolas preds (cheapest AV 13 I can get) in my armor lists. I'm forced to use a land raider, but at least it's fast which means it dictates engagement range usually.

 Talizvar wrote:
The part that bothers me a bit is I like rules.
I like them even more if the function in a reasonable way.

It feels strange to discuss if it is ok to use a unit that is specifically included in the game for use.
It would be like saying you can never field a Tie-Defender in X-wing.
Or a Queen in chess since that model is way OP in the game compared to the other pieces.

I know now at this time 40k is more of a scenario sandbox RPG for playing out stories you may have heard of in the fluff.
The days of straight-out-of-the-rules-competitive-play is long over.

I do have to ask the question though: if the game is to be casual and extra rules of etiquette are tacked-on, why should you care if someone fields an IK?
They only wanted to have fun or they would not have fielded it.
It is a proud achievement to get one together, more so if painted: are you going to be TFG and tell them you will not play them because you do not like their model?
How "casual" is this game again?

As a player and a person if you asked me if you could bring an Imperial Knight to a casual game I'd wonder why you were telling me what's in your list, shrug and tell you to "Go for it".
As a player reading rumours about 8th ed and thinking there's still a chance of getting an opinion heard, especially if others agree, I'm saying Super Heavies belong in Apoc games. That's where you show off your biggest, badest and most insane projects. That's where people admire the hundreds of dollars and hours you spent on that behemoth, in a regular 40k match the response is "Wow can I really afford to play this game?".

Exactly Martel, but you understand they won't live and it's simply a means to an end.

We aren't back in the old days of the living metal monolith terrorising the field.

AV13/12 and 6HP really is no threat.
Yes you can't immobilise or destroy it's weapons, but you don't need to.
You just kill it and it's done.

" I'm saying Super Heavies belong in Apoc games."

I'm saying Riptides and Dreadknights and Flyrants belong there too by that logic.

Martel732 wrote:
" I'm saying Super Heavies belong in Apoc games."

I'm saying Riptides and Dreadknights and Flyrants belong there too by that logic.

funny thing is if they removed SHVs and GCs from 40k... Magnus and Gulliman'd still be present. Magnus is a MONSTERIOUS creature, and chances are Gulliman'll be one, or even just classed as Infantry (which is, how FW classed them)

Martel732 wrote:
" I'm saying Super Heavies belong in Apoc games."

I'm saying Riptides and Dreadknights and Flyrants belong there too by that logic.

Rips and Dreadknights should be vehicles and subject to all their weaknesses.

I wonder why Blood Angels don't have access to any decent low cost fliers...is there a fluff reasoning to that?

Because BA are the ghetto have-not marines.

Martel732 wrote:
Because BA are the ghetto have-not marines.

Twilight.
Universal hatred for vampires that sparkle, even if the sparkle is armour reflecting muzzle flash from a Bolter.

When your oponnent agrees to it, like for every single other unit in the game.

 Jackal wrote:
Stripping or immobilising the weapons of 3 russ but can't take 6 HP of a knight?
I don't see it, sorry.

You never remove the weapons or immobilise a vehicle then leave it as it's points sat there.
If your army can't remove 6 HP off AV13 (if for some reason you shoot the front of it) with the chance of doing 3 HP in 1 go then your army has a big issue.


While people are saying the should be apocalypse only units, this isn't 6th any more.
There are far more devastating units that can be taken that aren't super heavy, GC or use D weapons.

Considering what grav cents can do to any vehicle.
Riptides that ignore most shooting.
Flyrants which can be a sheer pain.
Scatterbikes for massed shooting.

None of the above fit the apocalypse criteria, yet all of them are far more effective in a list than a knight is.

I also believe IK or WK aren't that hard to deal with, but you seem to be forgetting about the 4+ (or 3+) invulnerable save, which does make a huge difference.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BrianDavion wrote:
Magnus is a MONSTERIOUS creature

What's that, monstrous and mysterious?
Or is it monstrous and serious? ... Magnus does look serious.

I'm not forgetting about it, it's not a true ++ save though as it only applies to 1 facing per shooting phase.

If it applied to all facings at all times then it would be worse.

 Jackal wrote:
Exactly Martel, but you understand they won't live and it's simply a means to an end.

We aren't back in the old days of the living metal monolith terrorising the field.

AV13/12 and 6HP really is no threat.
Yes you can't immobilise or destroy it's weapons, but you don't need to.
You just kill it and it's done.

But compare a Knight to say, an Ork Killbursta.

KillBursta with the D kannon is 400 points. It's got 7HP, 14/13/12.

On paper, the D (fnarr) makes it more appealing than a Knight - and toughness wise they're not far off each other (the Knight's shield can only cover one facing, so a bit of positioning can render it moot).

Except. That's ]all the dakka the Killbursta has. That one gun. Yes, it's a horrible 7" S-D blast. But unless targeting a densely packed area, still only squashing one unit a turn, tops. The Knight as I explained above can threaten 4 units (five if you count the co-axial Heavy Stubber. Generally, I don't!) each and every turn.

And the tricked out Knight's points are sufficiently higher than the Killbursta to offset - a Knight model can simply achieve more over the course of the game.

So at the core, you're right. The answer is 'just kill the Knight'. But that's no mean feat - especially in smaller games where points at a premium. If you load out for Knight hunting, you'll likely find yourself short on anti-infantry firepower. And if you drop the Knight in the first turn, a lot of heavy firepower going to waste over the next five or so turns.

That's what makes Knights an unpleasant surprise, and not something I'd ever demand my opponent 'man up and face'

I always like the site of a Knight on the battlefield (even though I don't field any).

I guess try it out with willing friends and see if its cheesy

True Dok about multi threats, and the killbursta is a new one to me (not faced one)
But a knight isn't threatening up to five targets atall.

Fully kitted your looking at a rapid fire BC, avenger or thermal and rocket pods.
It's other weapons only really threaten a few lone guardsmen at the most.
The FW ones do so even less due to no carapace weapon and usually 1 main weapon.

Without even going with a superheavy you can run 3 vindicators (or laser destroyer variants) with a pintle weapons.
To fully neutralise them you need to cause 6 weapon destroyed results, which means 6 pens.
That shooting alone will cause havoc against a knight.
The damage output is also higher from the 3 vindicators too.

I guess what I'm trying to say is for the cost, you can run basic units that can cause a lot more damage.
Imagine 500 points of scatter bikes for example?

It just feels like we are going back in time to when this stigma of superheavies and FW were around.
Granted I understand if it's a pickup game then you don't go all out.
But you also don't have to stop taking half the decent units available.

If for some reason I'm playing my nids I'll run a flyrant in a casual game.
This isn't because I want to run a stupidly strong unit, but because I want a unit capable of actually achieving things 90% of the book can't.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

On paper, the D (fnarr) makes it more appealing than a Knight - and toughness wise they're not far off each other (the Knight's shield can only cover one facing, so a bit of positioning can render it moot).

In order to damage a knight, you pretty much need to be firing on one of the AV12 sides, without shield, which means in the best of cases, you have 50% of your forces on each flank, one of which will lose 50% of its DPS.

So IF and WHEN you manage to outflank the Knight without risking Titanic Explosion in your face and without being in the feet of another Knight or within range of another serious threat, you will indeed hit it 75% of the time, which in the worst of cases for the IK player means it's got an effective 8 EHP (effective HP).

In most realistic cases, you're a lot closer to 9 EHP, which makes it quite tough.

I wouldn't count +33 to +50% EHP as "moot".

 Jackal wrote:

I guess what I'm trying to say is for the cost, you can run basic units that can cause a lot more damage.
Imagine 500 points of scatter bikes for example?

The thing is, problems with the points costs and designs of the Eldar codex don't really forgive Apoc units wandering around in 40k. A bolter can kill a scatbike. A TAC army can murder scatbikes. Sure, they're ridiculously undercosted for what they do but they're not such a rude thing that you have to redesign your entire army to specifically deal with them in low points games where points are premium else they will just run rampage over you without a word in edgeways.

It just feels like we are going back in time to when this stigma of superheavies and FW were around.
Granted I understand if it's a pickup game then you don't go all out.
But you also don't have to stop taking half the decent units available.

Superheavies and Gargantuans aren't 'half the decent units available'. A lot of the examples you are harking point to basic design flaws within respective codexes, rather than the fact that Superheavies and Gargantuans are a giant pile of rules that really, really don't fit into 1500 or less 40k. Even at 1850 they're pushing it.

If for some reason I'm playing my nids I'll run a flyrant in a casual game.
This isn't because I want to run a stupidly strong unit, but because I want a unit capable of actually achieving things 90% of the book can't.

I don't think a single person here has judged you about running Flyrants. They are the strongest unit Tyranids have. And to be perfectly fair the Tyranid army is in such a sad state that you need at least something that functions.

Thing is though...

Let's look at Superheavies and Gargantuans available across the board shall we?

Any Army of the Imperium can tack on an Imperial Knight detachment...in addition to anything it may have itself.
Eldar have Wraithknights - which are horrendously undercosted, are horrendously more resilient than any other GC in the game with the exception of the Nurgle Daemon Lord and come in an army that has an abundance of units that are undercosted. In fact, the 'bad' units in the Eldar codex...aren't really that bad at all. They're simply 'average'. Which in a Codex full of undercosted wonders makes them bad.
DE are basically hosed unless they consider an Eldar CAD tacked on. (oh no, so horrible).
Orks get...well...overpointed and expensive superheavies that don't compare to the IK in terms of what they can threaten.
Tyranids....hoo boy, I'm sorry. True, the Harridan is a wonder. A hideously expensive wonder. But your cheap superheavies...don't compare at all to the WK walking around waving it wraith-dong in your face. Like, they're 40 points shy of the Eldar player being able to take 2 for your 1 Hierodule.
Tau - welcome to more undercosted units in another undercosted Codex.

As I see it 40k has a lot of problems of its own before you start throwing in Apocalypse units. It's already a rules glut of unbalanced factions and an ally chart that went slightly out of control.

And really, Superheavies and Gargantuans have been shoved in. They're not that bad, no. But in a game where certain factions already tout huge advantages over others giving them even more advantages just takes the piss really. Especially when the factions that are weaker even have sub par Superheavies and Gargantuans as well.

 Jackal wrote:


It just feels like we are going back in time to when this stigma of superheavies and FW were around.

it's more like a small vocal minority never left that time. ever since IKs left there has always been a number of people who just think IKs don't belong. in fact the number of people saying that has shrunk since IKs first hit us

 DarkStarSabre wrote:

Eldar have Wraithknights - which are horrendously undercosted, are horrendously more resilient than any other GC in the game with the exception of the Nurgle Daemon Lord and come in an army that has an abundance of units that are undercosted. In fact, the 'bad' units in the Eldar codex...aren't really that bad at all. They're simply 'average'. Which in a Codex full of undercosted wonders makes them bad.

You can't expect to be taken seriously after whining so much about the Eldar and not dropping a single word about Space Marines, Necrons, Tau, Chaos...

Everyone who actually plays this game knows that some Eldar units are incredibly sucky at everything, and that most of them are just average.

Take the Ranger: there isn't a single sniper in the game which isn't vastly better for the point cost - and snipers generally suck in this game.
How is that not a bad unit?


The one thing which could be considered immensely wrong in this whole IK in the context of balance discussion, is that the SuperFriends, who always have one solid combo and oftentimes game-breaking ones (ITC banning Electro-Displacement case in point), also get access to the IK.
Which doesn't matter, since the IK is not really overpowered and is thus never included in a competitive army more or less.

" A bolter can kill a scatbike"

Bolters can't kill dreadnoughts either. Are dreadnoughts now OP? Killing an IK is a lot like killing two dreadnoughts. But wait! A bolter CAN hurt a Riptide. It just has a 1.2% chance of doing so. The Tau thank you for wasting your fire. Personally, I'd rather have the riptide so fools who believe in the heart of the dice can waste their firepower.

". A TAC army can murder scatbikes"

Let me know how that works out for you, unless you are playing the world's derpiest Eldar player.

morgoth wrote:
You can't expect to be taken seriously after whining so much about the Eldar and not dropping a single word about Space Marines, Necrons, Tau, Chaos...

please read the entire (unedited) thread.

 DarkStarSabre wrote:
Tau - welcome to more undercosted units in another undercosted Codex.

and you sir. . . undercosted? they are one dimensional - find a way to survive their shooting (which can be difficult, I admit) and the army falls apart.

Martel732 wrote:
Bolters can't kill dreadnoughts either. Are dreadnoughts now OP? Killing an IK is a lot like killing two dreadnoughts. But wait! A bolter CAN hurt a Riptide. It just has a 1.2% chance of doing so. The Tau thank you for wasting your fire. Personally, I'd rather have the riptide so fools who believe in the heart of the dice can waste their firepower.

A bolter actually has the same hideously unlikely chance to kill a dreadnought; from behind. A riptide? Can be killed from any direction.

GMC's and Superheavy's belong in games of 2000+ points. I would argue that should go for all LoW's too. I don't care if one faction had one of these that's undercosted compared to others, the fact remains that you can squeeze multiple of these models into 1000 point armies and be "legal" in doing so. Obviously, there are gaming groups that shun that kind of cheese or whatnot but this isn't always the case. Apoc is where those guys should have stayed but I sincerely hope that GW puts a points threshold that limits their usage somehow.

No, bolters harm AV 10 at a rate of 11.1% per shot. That's an order of magnitude better, actually.

My contention is that with 1.2% wound clearance, bolters can't kill Riptides, either. It's only theoretically possible.

" and the army falls apart. "

Except Riptides and Stormsurges are pretty good in CC.

I hate being quoted.
If someone's going to quote me, quote the whole section.
Don't cut it off at a point in which it changes the context of my point.

My main point being that for a full shooting knight it's floating around 500 points.
For this any army can run units or a unit that far out does the knight for both shooting and it's ability to survive.

Also, this whole thing about GMCs and super heavies all being OP is complete bollocks (excuse the language) but it is.
A few are excessive, yes, but nowhere near all of them.

The imperial knight has access to strength D through a CC weapon, no ranged atall.
If like some people have said, it's kitted out for shooting, you lose that too.

So in regards to shooting your getting: 2 battle cannon shots that must target the same unit, a thermal cannon or avenger cannon, a skyfire autocannon system or an ironically poor missile system (either of them)

So for 500 points no army is able to match that damage?
I'm sorry, but even in a casual game thats far from devastating shooting lol.



On a side note, my tyranid GMCs take exception to being classed as OP lol.
No strength D atall, at most it's a barrage of S10 moderate AP shooting.
Hardly resilient to incoming fire either.
All for the small cost of........ ignore that, nothing is close to being points effective lol.
My hierophant and harridan act as book ends on a shelf.

Most FW stuff is really only worth it for the beauty of the models

And that includes Revenant Titans, which before the D-nerf were considered really good.

But the Knight's potency in combat is considerable without the Chainsword, simply because of Stomp.

I had good fortune during an Apocaylpse game (I know, totally different scale, but just used as an example). I got my full three Stomps off. I was able to 'walk' them up the table, and boot a Predator that was previously hiding in cover.

So if a Knight can make combat early on, say with a unit that can't reliably damage it, or do enough at once to worry the Knight, it can still have a say on the battle, after a fashion.

So whilst not especially difficult to take down, it's a Knight's flexibility that makes it overwhelming for some.

"So whilst not especially difficult to take down, it's a Knight's flexibility that makes it overwhelming for some."

I disagree. There's nothing overwhelming about a knight at all. And that's coming from one of the poorest armies in the game. It's so expensive for how durable it is. Or isn't.

Jackal, excuse me for not quoting you, but the wording for (the damage portion of) stomp and StrD are identical, no? It is why the Crusader, with its lack of a strD weapon was acceptable. . . and then it gets its Str10 AP2 attacks and then stomps anyway?

Riptides I'll grant you should arguably be worse in CC. If the original intent of the Riptide was to make a scaled up Crisis suit, then more power to them, but there would have been no justification for Hammer of Wrath or Smash

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
But the Knight's potency in combat is considerable without the Chainsword, simply because of Stomp.

The stomp is awesome but that's not everything.

In a normal 40K game, the Knight is extremely dangerous because of its ability to implode at strength D in your face.

In an Apocalypse game, the Knight is a true Titan slayer, dealing massive damage with a reasonable number of attacks, especially when compared to a Titan which generally has 2 or 3 clumsy attacks.

Plus, being a superheavy, it doesn't get stomped


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 carldooley wrote:
Jackal, excuse me for not quoting you, but the wording for (the damage portion of) stomp and StrD are identical, no? It is why the Crusader, with its lack of a strD weapon was acceptable. . . and then it gets its Str10 AP2 attacks and then stomps anyway?

Riptides I'll grant you should arguably be worse in CC. If the original intent of the Riptide was to make a scaled up Crisis suit, then more power to them, but there would have been no justification for Hammer of Wrath or Smash

S10AP2 is garbage compared to strength D if the target has multiple HP.

The only thing that is comparable is that stomp 6 deletes models, whereas Strength D deals a 6+D6 no saves no FnP.

It can still be Look-out-Sir'd, whereas the stomp cannot be.

Stomp is also done at initiative 1 however.
Meaning fists and the like also go at the same time.

So it's nowhere near the same as a strength D chainsword would be.


Don't get me wrong, it's still bloody good.
But killing a unit and losing the knight at the same time, not so good.

As I said, I'm by no means saying knights are bad, because they aren't.
But they essentially get what they pay for, no more, no less.

I'd say you can play one in a 1500pt list no problem, my standard 1500pt Marine list has 3 StormTalons with Skyhammer Missiles in it. That's one dead Knight

So yeah, we boil down to opinion.

It is OK to field an Imperial Knight according to the rules. Period.

Now, a whole different topic is if you are lobbying for changes in 8th edition.
So big bad heavies meant for the larger more epic battles? Sure, if we can all agree it should be a squad based game like Bolt Action.

This trend in "getting opponent's permission" is only for models that fall outside of allowable choices.
Imperial Knights are not one of them.
I am not obligated to clear my valid army list with my opponent.
But what can rightly be said: my opponent is not obligated to play me but it sure seems petty to refuse.

I'd get laughed out of the room for not granting "permission" on a legal choice.

Who wouldn't really?

"Can you show me where, on the Imperial Knight, that the Eldar player touched you?"

It's OK to use an Imperial Knight - when it "fits".

Your mileage almost certainly WILL vary from mine.

My start point is small games - say - 800/1000 points. Unless it's a special scenario, I wouldn't expect to see any heavy hitters in a list.

I think of this points zone as recon or skirmish patrol. Go out and find the enemy. Be tough enough to handle something a little stronger, but know when to report back too..... I'm not expecting a named character to lead a patrol, nor to find him riding in a Baneblade.... without listing ALL exclusions - I hope you can see what I'm getting at.

As long as your opponent knows you're taking it, they hopefully have a chance to adapt. It's lame when you're taking a 500 point list and your opponent brings something that an otherwise TAC list could hardly touch.

 Rolsheen wrote:
I'd say you can play one in a 1500pt list no problem, my standard 1500pt Marine list has 3 StormTalons with Skyhammer Missiles in it. That's one dead Knight

Or just have drop pod melta. Strength 8 in melta range vs AV12...

JamesWright83 wrote:
I currently have 1000 points of Grey knights (Librarian, three squads of Terminators and a Dreadknight). I'm doing really well with them, but like the idea of adding in an Imperial Knight Crusader for some long range firepower, something the Grey Knights really lack - plus the model looks really cool.

At what points cost is having a Knight ally acceptable? Adding him to my 1000 points to make a 1500 point army, or wait until I have 1500 and add him to make it 2000?

I don't play competitively, and enjoy casual games with a large group of semi-regular opponents, and certainly don't want to put people off playing me or make them think I'm being cheesy.

Any advice would be great! Thanks

You are playing grey knights, feel free to field a knight. All of you units will be very potent, BUT you will only have 3-4 of them, so I think there are quite a few reasonable answers to your army. Tougher on nids and DE and orks, but you know your friends units and what they like.

morgoth wrote:

 DarkStarSabre wrote:

Eldar have Wraithknights - which are horrendously undercosted, are horrendously more resilient than any other GC in the game with the exception of the Nurgle Daemon Lord and come in an army that has an abundance of units that are undercosted. In fact, the 'bad' units in the Eldar codex...aren't really that bad at all. They're simply 'average'. Which in a Codex full of undercosted wonders makes them bad.

You can't expect to be taken seriously after whining so much about the Eldar and not dropping a single word about Space Marines, Necrons, Tau, Chaos...

Everyone who actually plays this game knows that some Eldar units are incredibly sucky at everything, and that most of them are just average.

Take the Ranger: there isn't a single sniper in the game which isn't vastly better for the point cost - and snipers generally suck in this game.
How is that not a bad unit?


The one thing which could be considered immensely wrong in this whole IK in the context of balance discussion, is that the SuperFriends, who always have one solid combo and oftentimes game-breaking ones (ITC banning Electro-Displacement case in point), also get access to the IK.
Which doesn't matter, since the IK is not really overpowered and is thus never included in a competitive army more or less.

Cute. Real cute.

Yes, let's look at the Ranger. Oh no, it;s not better than every other sniper unit in the game. We're going to ignore the fact that there is zero requirement to take them in your meta-detachment and if using a CAD you also have access to scatbikes and DAs. Rangers are bad in the fact that other units in their codex do similar jobs better.

And that's the case of the Eldar. You have a handful of 'mediocre' units while most armies have a handful of 'good' units. Are you seriously trying to tell me that Scatbikes, Warp Spiders and WKs are not horrendously undercosted for what they are doing? Let's add in your FW options too.

Now here's the fun part.

Go look at the LVO Eldar armies.

They're all the fething same. Every. fething. Single. One. Same guilty units for the simple reason that they are undercosted and overperform. If that's not a red flag concerning those units I don't know what is. And it's not as though Eldar are lacking for options in what they can and cannot run. It's not like you're suffering for choice really.

But it's ok, Keep up your meme.

And let's look at the others.

SM - are remarkably bland. Gladius is annoying, yes. But the problem with SM is...Grav. The fact that almost everything is taken min-max to squeeze in as much Grav as possible. And that's a problem with a weapon type. If Grav was suddenly dropped to AP - that wounded on the save value it'd be trash. And holy crap would it nuke three quarters of the Marine armies out there. You wonder why you don't see so many Starcannons in Eldar armies anymore? Because they gutted them in 4th edition.

Tau - already mentioned, thanks. Personally, I find that Tau and Eldar are the armies that exacerbate the MC/GC issues. Riptides, WKs, Stormsurges. Those are your culprits. Ultimately the problem was whatever designer thought Wraith Constructs and Tau suits needed to be treated as organic entities rather than vehicles.

Hell, Chaos have a stronger claim for it being thematically feasible for Daemon Engines to be MCs and GCs than Tau suits do. But unfortunately it's a case of one army design philosophy versus the other. Are MCs and GCs strong? Yes, yes they are.

But the strongest MCs and GCs that you will encounter in any sort of frequency are...in Tau and Eldar armies. So, strong armies which are getting the advantage of undercosted units with strong unit type rules. Huh.

NERF MCS AND GCS!

No. Because at that point you literally gak on other armies that had MCs and GCs as their thing - which they really don't so much anymore because theirs are hideously expensive, need babysitting and don't have anywhere near the same damage output as the new ones that have cropped up.

Saying Tau are fine because they're weak in CC is a joke. First, you have to survive Overwatch from multiple sources at increased BS - with high strength weapons to boot. Fun fun. Then you have to realise that MCs and GCs are still relatively good in assaults.

Really, those two armies are clusterfucks in terms of balance on their own.

Hey, let's look at Chaos for you. Sure.

You seriously going to argue that CSM are CHEESE, OP, NERF NERF just because they finally got a supplement that brought them sort-of on par to SM after an entire edition and 3/4s? Want to whine about the OP Daemon Prince gimmicks? Sure. It's literally a gimmick for a handful of Legions.

But Death Guard get FNP and Relentless! Nerf! Nerf! Welp, I suppose that's upsetting for you when you consider that we're literally paying points for it and getting an Initiative drop to boot. Oh, and we can't dip into Be'lakor...and hilariously can't take Typhus' Plague Zombies ( Typhus states the Cultists cannot have any upgrades but the Legion rules state they MUST have the Mark of Nurgle where possible - which is an upgrade.)

We have first turn charges from World Eaters. If you roll the right dice. But wait, it's an assault from...Marine equivalents. Okay. Maybe it's only right for this sort of thing to actually be happening?

But seriously, nice Eldar Ranger meme.

The Eldar Ranger is not a blanket defense or excuse for Scatbikes and WKs. Seriously.

Rangers 60pts TROOPS
Ancient Doom, Battle Focus, Fleet, Infiltrate, Move Through Cover, Shrouded
4 4 3 3 1 5 1 8 5+
Rifle 36" SX ap6 Heavy1 Sniper
Shuriken Pistol 12" S4 ap5 Bladestorm, Pistol

Wolf Scouts 70pts ELITES
Accute Senses, ATSKNF, Counter Attack, Move Through Cover, Infiltrate, Scout
4 4 4 4 4 1 8 4+
Assault Grenades 8" S3 ap- assault1, blast
Boltgun 24" S4 ap5 rapidfire
Bolt Pistol 12" S4 ap5 Pistol
Krak Grenades 8" S6 ap4 assault1
For an extra 1ppm we can swap the Boltguns for Sniper Rifles.
For an extra 2ppm we can give them a +1 to their cover save.

Yeah, I think there's worse Scouts than Rangers.

If you can kill 3 Predators you can kill an Imperial Knight. Simple as that.

Main difference is that in most situations the Knight will run at you, though that might be beneficial to you...

SM - are remarkably bland. Gladius is annoying, yes. But the problem with SM is...Grav. The fact that almost everything is taken min-max to squeeze in as much Grav as possible. And that's a problem with a weapon type. If Grav was suddenly dropped to AP - that wounded on the save value it'd be trash. And holy crap would it nuke three quarters of the Marine armies out there. You wonder why you don't see so many Starcannons in Eldar armies anymore? Because they gutted them in 4th edition.

I'd argue the biggest reason for why we see grav-spam from Marines is something you also address later in your post. MCs. you see grav because they're a solid anti-MC weapon in a meta that's dripping with them.

BrianDavion wrote:

SM - are remarkably bland. Gladius is annoying, yes. But the problem with SM is...Grav. The fact that almost everything is taken min-max to squeeze in as much Grav as possible. And that's a problem with a weapon type. If Grav was suddenly dropped to AP - that wounded on the save value it'd be trash. And holy crap would it nuke three quarters of the Marine armies out there. You wonder why you don't see so many Starcannons in Eldar armies anymore? Because they gutted them in 4th edition.

I'd argue the biggest reason for why we see grav-spam from Marines is something you also address later in your post. MCs. you see grav because they're a solid anti-MC weapon in a meta that's dripping with them.

No, we see so much grav because it is a solide anti-everything weapon.

Jorim wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

SM - are remarkably bland. Gladius is annoying, yes. But the problem with SM is...Grav. The fact that almost everything is taken min-max to squeeze in as much Grav as possible. And that's a problem with a weapon type. If Grav was suddenly dropped to AP - that wounded on the save value it'd be trash. And holy crap would it nuke three quarters of the Marine armies out there. You wonder why you don't see so many Starcannons in Eldar armies anymore? Because they gutted them in 4th edition.

I'd argue the biggest reason for why we see grav-spam from Marines is something you also address later in your post. MCs. you see grav because they're a solid anti-MC weapon in a meta that's dripping with them.

No, we see so much grav because it is a solide anti-everything weapon.

This. the only thing grav really falls down against is low armour hordes.

Wait, you're running an army with bolters as basic weapons. That solves that problem.

The problem's not so much Marines as it is Grav.

Grav is just too good an all rounder.

Kills bikes. Kills MEQ. Kills TEQ. Kills GC. Kills MC. Kills armour.

It's the Starcannon of 6th edition onwards.

Well, this brought up something from yesterday.

I was over at Gene's and he was talking about a game he had had with Timmy. Now Gene has only got 1.2K's worth of his Genestealer cult, and his sole big hitter is a Leman Russ.
Timmy wanted a 1750 game. "Thats okay" he said "You can recycle units". Everything was fine according to Gene, but then he mentioned one thing that made me pause.
Timmy had brought his new knight.
Honestly I am glad Timmy was not there or I think I would have floored him. As it was the only thing that stopped it being a white wash was Gene's Cult Ambush rules allowing most of his units to skip the first two thirds/three quarters of the board and get close fast, denying Timmy objectives and ultimately allowing him to scrape a draw.

I brought mine in 3000> games. Nobody complains about anything at that level.

 DarkStarSabre wrote:

Grav is just too good an all rounder.

Kills bikes. Kills MEQ. Kills TEQ. Kills GC. Kills MC. Kills armour.

This. It is not just too good in general, it ruins the internal balance of the codex. Most marine heavy and special weapons used to have their uses, but now there is little reason to take anything except the grav. Marines are my main army and I despise grav.

Grav is necessary because WK and Riptide are basically immune to other Imperial heavy weapons in the quantities you can field them. For example, it's around 40 BS 4 lascannon shots to kill Riptide.

 master of ordinance wrote:
Well, this brought up something from yesterday.

I was over at Gene's and he was talking about a game he had had with Timmy. Now Gene has only got 1.2K's worth of his Genestealer cult, and his sole big hitter is a Leman Russ.
Timmy wanted a 1750 game. "Thats okay" he said "You can recycle units". Everything was fine according to Gene, but then he mentioned one thing that made me pause.
Timmy had brought his new knight.
Honestly I am glad Timmy was not there or I think I would have floored him. As it was the only thing that stopped it being a white wash was Gene's Cult Ambush rules allowing most of his units to skip the first two thirds/three quarters of the board and get close fast, denying Timmy objectives and ultimately allowing him to scrape a draw.

So even with such suboptimal conditions it was a draw. I don't think this anyway demonstrates that the knights are OP.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
Grav is necessary because WK and Riptide are basically immune to other Imperial heavy weapons in the quantities you can field them. For example, it's around 40 BS 4 lascannon shots to kill Riptide.

Right. But this is a problem with MC/Vehicle rules and making things that are obviously vehicles into MCs. It is completely stupid that dedicated anti-armour weapons such as lascannons and meltas are laughably ineffective against alien-made giant robots.

You forget Grav is better than the Heavy weapons simply because they allow you to remain mobile.

"Right. But this is a problem with MC/Vehicle rules and making things that are obviously vehicles into MCs. It is completely stupid that dedicated anti-armour weapons such as lascannons and meltas are laughably ineffective against alien-made giant robots."

As long as that problem exists, we need grav in the game. Unfortunate, but true.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You forget Grav is better than the Heavy weapons simply because they allow you to remain mobile.

That too.

Martel732 wrote:
"Right. But this is a problem with MC/Vehicle rules and making things that are obviously vehicles into MCs. It is completely stupid that dedicated anti-armour weapons such as lascannons and meltas are laughably ineffective against alien-made giant robots."

As long as that problem exists, we need grav in the game. Unfortunate, but true.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You forget Grav is better than the Heavy weapons simply because they allow you to remain mobile.

That too.

Except to solve a problem you need a solution for everyone.

Not a solution for a few that further gimps the other armies.



Saying grav is needed for reason X or Y is crap, as it simply makes a few armies with access to it better and continues the power creep.
It's just killing one big issue with yet another.

Yes it makes marines able to kill those problem units.
It also makes them able to kill all other units bar a few crappy ones with ease.



The armies that don't have grav then have to contend with both the WK/tide issue while also facing grav aswell.

So it's no more of a fix than it is yet another issue.
If we are binning the WK rules as it is etc then the grav needs to go with it.

Grav simply needs to wound against size like it was intended to. Swarms on 6, infantry on 5+, Bulky on 4+, very bulky on 3+, everything bigger on 2+ and merely strip the HP on a 6 instead of immobilized on top of it.

Bam, simple fix.

 Jackal wrote:
Except to solve a problem you need a solution for everyone.

Not a solution for a few that further gimps the other armies.



Saying grav is needed for reason X or Y is crap, as it simply makes a few armies with access to it better and continues the power creep.
It's just killing one big issue with yet another.

Yes it makes marines able to kill those problem units.
It also makes them able to kill all other units bar a few crappy ones with ease.



The armies that don't have grav then have to contend with both the WK/tide issue while also facing grav aswell.

So it's no more of a fix than it is yet another issue.
If we are binning the WK rules as it is etc then the grav needs to go with it.

Pretty much this.

Everyone saying 'We need Grav because of Riptides, Stormsurges and WKs!' needs to step back and look at what Chaos, Orks and Tyranids get to deal with such things.

Doesn't help that the 'grav' armies also get access to FREE GAK formations (looking at you Ad Mech Convocation, you guilty piece of gak) putting them even further beyond others.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Grav simply needs to wound against size like it was intended to. Swarms on 6, infantry on 5+, Bulky on 4+, very bulky on 3+, everything bigger on 2+ and merely strip the HP on a 6 instead of immobilized on top of it.

Bam, simple fix.

That's actually not a bad idea. It might need some tweaking as far as that wound chart after playtesting but not a bad idea.

Anyway, as far as knights go, my opinion on this is probably kind of biased since my armies have ways of dealing with them. Admech has haywire and grav (lol) for days, and with orks I can either powerfist it to death or just ignore it, depending on the type of knight. I'd say around 1500 is a good start, but you do need to let your opponent ahead of time that you're bringing one.

I get everyone to tell me their lists and refuse to fight anything that I think could be a problem for what I want to play.

I think ban on heavies come down to people wanting to play what they like and getting mad it sucks. I notice a lot more eldar tau and space marines complain about everything.

Where as an ex ork player who liked flash gits I got use to playing things that suck and against things that are just better. Times change people.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Grav simply needs to wound against size like it was intended to. Swarms on 6, infantry on 5+, Bulky on 4+, very bulky on 3+, everything bigger on 2+ and merely strip the HP on a 6 instead of immobilized on top of it.

Bam, simple fix.

This would indeed be a clear improvement and would make more sense. It is completely absurd that a thing you pay points for (armour) can become a liability. Terminators were bad enough without bs like that.

I like the wound on size thing. and it'd be easy to change for 8th edition as well given grav is a USR.

Gonna have to say 2k or over. At 2.5k an opponent probably has enough tools to handle one well enough or a baneblade variant.

Of course i play dark eldar and the only time i see vehicles is when somebody brings guard or a super heavy. Super heavies terrify me and so far i don't go above 2k points.

 mmzero252 wrote:
I typically bring one every time I go out to play, but I will only field it in a 2000 point game unless the other person brings one in a lower point match. We had a WWE Knight off one game and it was hilarious. The knights were only allowed to combat each other until one died.

Otherwise I keep it in reserve for the resident Necron cheese player (this guy just can't make a list that doesn't have 4 C'tan and his monolith. AND his tesseract vault). Or the Tau guy that frequently has been bringing a riptide wing and a stormsurge to 1500 points.

I bring a Knight to balance power. I play Sisters of Battle and don't run the singular competitve list, so a Knight can easily balance out the rest of my girls without being too good.

Since this tread has been answered on page 1, this is way far back and off topic, but a necron player is not cheesy if he brings 4 C'tan, a monolith and a vault (probably ranking in the very bottom end of our codex)

Sorry, had a chuckle at that. A basic CAD with all that in it, without the conclave of the burning one formation, is 1950 bare bones, with 1x lord (naked) and 2x 5 immortal squads. Are you seriously having trouble fighting that list?

Sure 5 c'tan powers a turn means some randomness is removed, but you still only have 4 MC, 11 foot troops and two AV14 vehicles ( with one that ALWAYS dies to a single melta shot)

Im sorry dude, this just blew me away. I cant think of an army that wouldn't table this every time it goes onto the field.

As somebody who plans on using two at some point, I don't actually think Imperial knights are OP. They die to a lucky lascannon shot. A single shot.

NivlacSupreme wrote:
As somebody who plans on using two at some point, I don't actually think Imperial knights are OP. They die to a lucky lascannon shot. A single shot.

You mean two lucky shots.

Martel732 wrote:

NivlacSupreme wrote:
As somebody who plans on using two at some point, I don't actually think Imperial knights are OP. They die to a lucky lascannon shot. A single shot.

You mean two lucky shots.

I thought an explode result was an instant kill?

Admittedly I only learned how vehicle damage worked yesterday.

Super heavy walkers and tanks only take D3 additional hull points from an explodes. Otherwise, they'd be totally useless instead of merely average. On the other hand, T6 MCs of all types don't give feth what you shoot them with.

Only in 40K can you shoot this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrannosaurus

with this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1_Abrams

and have the target laugh off the impact.

Hell, the IG can NUKE an MC. Result: one wound. Feth MCs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_munition One wound

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GAU-8_Avenger One wound

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun One wound

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_(nuclear_device) One wound

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba One wound

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter_weapon One wound

Only in 40k?
This guy and all his buddies are sad that you would say such a thing

Arson Fire wrote:
Only in 40k?
This guy and all his buddies are sad that you would say such a thing

Spoiler:

After his 98 effort I was sad for him.

Martel732 wrote:
Super heavy walkers and tanks only take D3 additional hull points from an explodes. Otherwise, they'd be totally useless instead of merely average. On the other hand, T6 MCs of all types don't give feth what you shoot them with.

Only in 40K can you shoot this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrannosaurus

with this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1_Abrams

and have the target laugh off the impact.

Hell, the IG can NUKE an MC. Result: one wound. Feth MCs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_munition One wound

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GAU-8_Avenger One wound

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun One wound

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_(nuclear_device) One wound

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba One wound

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter_weapon One wound

Not to be pedantic, but I was looking down that list and agreeing until I hit the GAU-8. Because you know that’s going to be closer to an assault cannon (or more probably an vulcan mega bolter or avenger bolt cannon or something like that)

The one big boom=1 wound, not mater how big the boom is, that’s an issue. But that’s a high ROF weapon right there.

The whole back half of that list are D weapons, so only 1 wound on a bad roll.

SJ

Martel732 wrote:
Super heavy walkers and tanks only take D3 additional hull points from an explodes. Otherwise, they'd be totally useless instead of merely average. On the other hand, T6 MCs of all types don't give feth what you shoot them with.

Only in 40K can you shoot this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrannosaurus

with this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1_Abrams

and have the target laugh off the impact.

Hell, the IG can NUKE an MC. Result: one wound. Feth MCs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_munition One wound

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GAU-8_Avenger One wound

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun One wound

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_(nuclear_device) One wound

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba One wound

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter_weapon One wound

However by all respects, that same dreaded T6 critter stomping about...

Falls down dead because a guy with a glowy sword runs up and gibs him while shouting Magic Missile!

Klowny wrote:

Since this tread has been answered on page 1, this is way far back and off topic, but a necron player is not cheesy if he brings 4 C'tan, a monolith and a vault (probably ranking in the very bottom end of our codex)

Sorry, had a chuckle at that. A basic CAD with all that in it, without the conclave of the burning one formation, is 1950 bare bones, with 1x lord (naked) and 2x 5 immortal squads. Are you seriously having trouble fighting that list?

Sure 5 c'tan powers a turn means some randomness is removed, but you still only have 4 MC, 11 foot troops and two AV14 vehicles ( with one that ALWAYS dies to a single melta shot)

Im sorry dude, this just blew me away. I cant think of an army that wouldn't table this every time it goes onto the field.

You clearly have absolutely zero experience with Sisters of Battle. They have no answer to enormously powerful creatures with ridiculous saves and range that cost far too few points.

But as you said, it ranks very low. Yeah now try literally anything else my army has access to against stronger lists. I have a very strong reason to refuse that jackass any games.

 Nevelon wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Super heavy walkers and tanks only take D3 additional hull points from an explodes. Otherwise, they'd be totally useless instead of merely average. On the other hand, T6 MCs of all types don't give feth what you shoot them with.

Only in 40K can you shoot this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrannosaurus

with this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1_Abrams

and have the target laugh off the impact.

Hell, the IG can NUKE an MC. Result: one wound. Feth MCs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_munition One wound

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GAU-8_Avenger One wound

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun One wound

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_(nuclear_device) One wound

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba One wound

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter_weapon One wound

Not to be pedantic, but I was looking down that list and agreeing until I hit the GAU-8. Because you know that’s going to be closer to an assault cannon (or more probably an vulcan mega bolter or avenger bolt cannon or something like that)

The one big boom=1 wound, not mater how big the boom is, that’s an issue. But that’s a high ROF weapon right there.

I was being hyperbolic. But that's a good point. Why can the US military put the GAU-8 on an airplane, but the space marines only get "assault" cannons?

I'd say 1250 or above. If they can't handle AV 12 at that point, they are going to have problems anyway.

 mmzero252 wrote:

Klowny wrote:

Since this tread has been answered on page 1, this is way far back and off topic, but a necron player is not cheesy if he brings 4 C'tan, a monolith and a vault (probably ranking in the very bottom end of our codex)

Sorry, had a chuckle at that. A basic CAD with all that in it, without the conclave of the burning one formation, is 1950 bare bones, with 1x lord (naked) and 2x 5 immortal squads. Are you seriously having trouble fighting that list?

Sure 5 c'tan powers a turn means some randomness is removed, but you still only have 4 MC, 11 foot troops and two AV14 vehicles ( with one that ALWAYS dies to a single melta shot)

Im sorry dude, this just blew me away. I cant think of an army that wouldn't table this every time it goes onto the field.

You clearly have absolutely zero experience with Sisters of Battle. They have no answer to enormously powerful creatures with ridiculous saves and range that cost far too few points.

But as you said, it ranks very low. Yeah now try literally anything else my army has access to against stronger lists. I have a very strong reason to refuse that jackass any games.

You are right my friend, I have never seen the Sisters in person :(. However, the enormously powerful creatures roll random powers after they specified a target. So your squads can get hit with a single D shot. 1 model dies. You can focus a Baneblade and 2/3 of the profiles dont work. Its completely random. They have access only to a 4++ save, no reanimation protocols? The tesseract vault is AV14 all around, but focused melta will kill it very quickly. It costs 550 points. Thats expensive for such a random unit. Your army has no access to vehicle killing weaponry? I dont mean to be ignorant I have just never seen much about them

Basic melta is the strongest thing that sisters get access to. Sadly that won't work if you cannot get within 6 inches with the most available melta. Even with outflanking, the necrons just demolish an immolator filled with 4 meltas and then smash every girl inside instantly. Celestine is now pretty much the only reliable necron vehicle killing tool, but even then she can die rather easily with hordes of gauss or said D weapons from C'tan.

I've never had a single ounce of fun playing necrons. Therefore I just refuse them games. I play to have fun. They can go play people that are enjoying the power creep as well if they want a game.