Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/07 19:49:48


Post by: Chaos Jim


To the Knight players, the railgun is busted. You can’t hide, you lose a Knight every turn because the Tau player has 2 hammerheads, you can’t shoot back that well because they’ll either be hiding, or you’re bracketed so you can’t hit the broadside of a barn, or you’re dead.
This got me thinking about something I thought about awhile ago.
What if you just bring an all armiger/war dog army?
You still get to play knights, but armiger class knights don’t have the titanic keyword. So they can hide.
I’ve done the calculations and you could run 14 armiger class knights in a standard 2k point game, and then equip half of them with autocannons.
Of course you’d have to buy 14 armigers, but they’re faster, are still quite tanky, and more expendable. Plus they all have obsec if you’re running mono knights, and they all count as 5 models for objectives.
I want to know if this is a decent counter play to the railgun if you still want to play mono knights.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 00:51:16


Post by: DreadfullyHopeful


I don't know... The railgun profile sure does seem scary. But there are other ways around it. We still don't know how tough the Hammerheads will be. In the end, the game turns to "catch the shark" and since the railgun requires LOS it'll also be hard for them to hide it.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 01:12:55


Post by: alextroy


Chaos Jim wrote:
To the Knight players, the railgun is busted. You can’t hide, you lose a Knight every turn because the Tau player has 2 hammerheads, you can’t shoot back that well because they’ll either be hiding, or you’re bracketed so you can’t hit the broadside of a barn, or you’re dead.
This is a bit of the sky is falling here. Assuming a Hammerhead as a BS 3+, it has a 59.3% chance of injuring a Knight with a shot of the Railgun (without additional rules being used). So firing two railguns at a single Knight has a very small chance of killing it (3% to be exact) and a decent chance of not even bracketing it.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 01:13:53


Post by: PenitentJake


This is because Knights don't have their dex yet.

They'll get some form of mitigation against this attack- whether a modified FNP, and Damage reduction, or a per phase damage limit like Ghaz.

Comparing a 9th dex to an 8th is always going to be at least a little bit busted; that's why edition churn sucks as a business model, and we'd all be better off with persistent edition based on campaign seasons system that provides small incremental upgrades and modest model releases for every faction every year.

(PS: No, that's not saying it doesn't suck for knight players- it does. It's also not saying they have no right to complain- they do)


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 01:38:50


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Ok, facts time:

1. Rail gun is limited by LoS.
2. It does not have character targeting.
3. It is on a t7 13 wound platform, currently.
4. Tau have a lot scarier things to knights.
5. Knights have a lot more scarier things than Tau Rail Guns.
6. Tau don't have a codex yet, and likely won't for at least a few months, so this isn't even an issue right now.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 01:59:00


Post by: AnomanderRake


This is why I play Knights in 30k and not in 40k.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 02:09:35


Post by: PenitentJake


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Ok, facts time:

1. Rail gun is limited by LoS.


I think this is the issue for knights players though- they're almost always going to have LOS vs a knight, because even obscuring terrain doesn't protect a knight unless it actually 100% blocks LOS to every antenna, gun barrel, or flag on the model, and almost no table has terrain that does this. Certain GW doesn't manufacture terrain that can do this.

That's the issue, not the actual power of the rail gun itself.

(Or rather, it's the combination of the two, not the power of the railgun by itself)


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 02:23:25


Post by: Eldenfirefly


It may not be very easy to hide multiple Hammerhead gunships. Those things are huge. And if the Hammerhead stats are similar to what it is the the past, then its a relatively fragile vehicle. So, you bring 3 hammerheads, you could easily have 2 out of 3 getting heavily damaged or outright destroyed if the knight army goes first if you are not able to hide them properly and they get line of sight after moving.

And if that was your only anti tank solution because you are relying on the OPness of that new Railgun, then you are in serious trouble against a knight army after it goes first and blows 2 of your hammerheads up.

Take 3 actual Hammerhead gunships and try and fit all of them behind obscuring terrain on a typical board. Now factor in knights can move 12 inches before shooting. It is seriously going to be a big task to try and hide 3 Hammerhead gunships completely.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 02:42:27


Post by: Chaos Jim


 DreadfullyHopeful wrote:
In the end, the game turns to "catch the shark" and since the railgun requires LOS it'll also be hard for them to hide it.


The thing I’m worried about is point cost, and you pretty much always get LoS on a knight. If the points are low then it’ll be an auto include and if you’re playing Tau against knights you’re going to want as many as you can take. If the Tau player goes first, the knight player will be down a model straight off the bat which is a about a good chunk of the knight army.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Eldenfirefly wrote:
It may not be very easy to hide multiple Hammerhead gunships. Those things are huge. And if the Hammerhead stats are similar to what it is the the past, then its a relatively fragile vehicle.


Fair enough, I’m just worried about how much the hammerhead will cost.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 03:00:56


Post by: Afrodactyl


The thing with the Hammerhead is that they're realistically only going to fire once. The Hammerheads will cripple but probably not kill one knight, at which point they turn around and blow them to bits and they don't have to worry about them any more.

A Hammerhead is something like T7 W13 S3+? That's not going to stand up to any sort of dedicated AT fire, especially when they're the primary threat to your Knights.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 03:01:58


Post by: Chaos Jim


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Ok, facts time:

3. It is on a t7 13 wound platform, currently.
4. Tau have a lot scarier things to knights.
5. Knights have a lot more scarier things than Tau Rail Guns.
6. Tau don't have a codex yet, and likely won't for at least a few months, so this isn't even an issue right now.


Yes the hammerhead isn’t very tough right now.
Most of the other options are going to be overshadowed by the railgun if the points are low enough.
The very big scary knight weapons are on the dominos pattern knights which are 600 points.
I have a friend who plays Tau, I don’t want him to be the guy that no one wants to play against.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
PenitentJake wrote:
This is because Knights don't have their dex yet.

They'll get some form of mitigation against this attack- whether a modified FNP, and Damage reduction, or a per phase damage limit like Ghaz.

Comparing a 9th dex to an 8th is always going to be at least a little bit busted; that's why edition churn sucks as a business model, and we'd all be better off with persistent edition based on campaign seasons system that provides small incremental upgrades and modest model releases for every faction every year.

(PS: No, that's not saying it doesn't suck for knight players- it does. It's also not saying they have no right to complain- they do)


Yes but GW would be walking a fine line here, I’m fairly sure everyone doesn’t want a repeat of 7th edition. GW would have to keep themselves in check to avoid another railgun panic scenario.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 03:14:38


Post by: Eldenfirefly


I would see how the new Tau actually play against knights before I worry so much. Historically, Tau are just really bad in combat. Its like once you touch them in combat, they are in big trouble.

Knights can step over infantry models when they fall out of combat and charge something in the back round as early as turn 2. And wardogs/armigers are so fast (14 inch move) that if they aren't blocked, they can easily be charging a backline unit on turn 2 as well.

Given knights are a skewed army (all vehicle, T7/T8) army. At least half or more of the Tau army's guns will be very inefficient shooting against knights, even if the railgun is super good. Sure, the knight army will take some licks on turn 1, 2. But then, turn 2, almost the whole knight army may be crashing into combat against the Tau. Tau may literally get to shoot for only 2 turns (or maybe even 1 turn) against a knight army before a ton of its stuff is stuck in combat with a knight army.

Like we worry about how a Tau army goes first and blows up one knight. But what if the Tau army took only 3 Hammerhead gunships and everything else is mostly anti infantry guns. Now if we go first, we stomp up the field, get line of sight and blast 2 hammerheads into scrap. The Tau army now has only 1 turn of shooting. Maybe that 1 hammerhead hits and wounds, and the rest of the army plinks enough small shots to kill off 1 knight. Turn 2, the whole Tau army now gets shot at and then charged by 2 knights and 3 or 4 wardogs. (Pretty sure the last Hammerhead will be gone in that turn). Game over at that point?

I mean, a Tau player going first against a knight army is of course worrying to the knight player. But in the same vein, a Knight army going first against a Tau player too would feel pretty scary too (see my example above). I mean, once the anti armor stuff is locked in combat or destroyed by shooting, there is very little in a Tau army that can stand up in close combat to knights or wardogs. Have you seen fire warriors fight knights in melee? Its pretty sad for those fire warriors.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 03:16:16


Post by: Chaos Jim


 alextroy wrote:
Chaos Jim wrote:
This is a bit of the sky is falling here. Assuming a Hammerhead as a BS 3+, it has a 59.3% chance of injuring a Knight with a shot of the Railgun (without additional rules being used). So firing two railguns at a single Knight has a very small chance of killing it (3% to be exact) and a decent chance of not even bracketing it.


The thing is it’s not just the railgun, they have the railguns and then the rest of the flipping owl. They still have the rest of their entire army to shoot with, and with the other leaked rules, it looks like Tau are going to become quite good at shooting.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Fair, but I’ve got a Tau player as a friend who’s built his army to deal with vehicles, because I play a bit of knights and with the new rule that lets battle suits shoot in combat helps make up for lack of combat proficiency. Not too mention the other new rules for the Tau that help their shooting in different ways, and the rest of the codex that has yet to be seen.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 03:29:34


Post by: Backspacehacker


Dont forget, railguns are NOT the most powerful gun they have.

whats also not mentioned is the fact the hammerhead can fly, so it can hide behind stuff, pop out, with zero impunity to shooting said rail gun.

Tau basically hard counters knight lists with no real way around it. Its just a feels batman.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 06:02:07


Post by: Daedalus81


Chaos Jim wrote:
What if you just bring an all armiger/war dog army?


Every Knight army should have Armigers. Taking four Knights is just boring to play and boring to play against.

I do imagine, however, that Rotate Ion Shields could become some sort of Transhuman for Knights. Some minus to wound mechanic, minus to damage, half damage, etc. It sucks to have to deal with this issue without a quick patch for sure.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 08:42:57


Post by: Spoletta


Don't get scared by big numbers.
The HH railgun isn't that good of an AT weapon, even against a target with an invul like a knight.

Even assuming that those things will have a BS3+, which is far from certain, they inflict 6,39 damage on average per turn.

For the same points, eradicators without any kind of buffs do 9,58! And those are infantries!

Knights have lived in a game with much more scarier forms of AT so far!


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 10:36:30


Post by: dreadblade


Spoletta wrote:
Don't get scared by big numbers.
The HH railgun isn't that good of an AT weapon, even against a target with an invul like a knight.

Even assuming that those things will have a BS3+, which is far from certain, they inflict 6,39 damage on average per turn.


Assuming correct, that's good to know


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 11:43:37


Post by: Blackie


You lose a knight every turn.... if the tau player has 4 hammerheads, assuming averages rolls and not insanely lucky ones.

And after one turn of shooting those hammerheads will be in LOS and the knight player can shoot most of them off the board.

Eradicators spam at the beginning of 9th was much more of a threat to knights, did the sky fall down then?


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 11:44:00


Post by: Jidmah


PenitentJake wrote:
I think this is the issue for knights players though- they're almost always going to have LOS vs a knight, because even obscuring terrain doesn't protect a knight unless it actually 100% blocks LOS to every antenna, gun barrel, or flag on the model, and almost no table has terrain that does this. Certain GW doesn't manufacture terrain that can do this.

That's the issue, not the actual power of the rail gun itself.

(Or rather, it's the combination of the two, not the power of the railgun by itself)


Speaking from my rather limited experience of regularly facing and fielding knight-class models, but not whole armies of knights, this seems like less of an issue in practice. If you have a big ruin (obscuring) right in front of you and there is a second big terrain piece in between it's still perfectly possible for models like morkanauts, a questoris class knight, Magnus or Mortarion to be completely invisible because of perspective.

Of course, it's a lot easier to line up shots, but that usually comes at the price of not being perfectly hidden from a flanking unit, even forcing you to sit in plain sight of one. You'll rarely be able to hide fully out of sight and shoot unhindered like LoS ignoring models do, especially not with three models of that size.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 11:48:12


Post by: ihockert


I'm not sure looking at the average damage for Hammerhead Shots is a great way of looking at them. Assuming BS3 a Hammerhead has a 58% chance of inflicting 10-12 wounds to a toughness 8 Knight. At BS4 it has a 49.5% chance of doing 10-12 wounds. The average isn't that useful because if the weapon hits and wounds you get smashed, but if it doesn't then nothing happens. Squads with multiple shots are going to have less skew in their results. I'm not saying the sky is falling when it comes to Tau as there is not enough information out there to make a judgement about anything.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 11:54:30


Post by: SamusDrake


Only thing is we're comparing 9th edition Tau rules against 8th edition rules + patches for Imperial / Chaos Knights. The situation might change when their 9th edition codices arrive...

That said, Armigers are definitely undervalued due to their mobility, are still Lords of War themselves and can now occupy objectives. Its worth mentioning that in Combat Patrols they're the only option for a Knight player; so they'll be going up against the Hammerhead anyway in that situation.

Speak of the devil; while I'm waiting for the Knight codices, my two warglaives could do with a helverin to back'em up and make up a patrol. Its a shame they don't have their own Household soliders to fill in the odd points...


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 12:00:20


Post by: deTox91


So given current codex configuration, 3 HHs + Longstrike which is BS 2+ and makes HHs 2+ too with innate reroll, adding in a CP reroll for a failed wound roll, what's the odd of loosing 2 knights turn 1? Not forgetting that this still leave the Tau with 1300 more pts for the rest of the army and to pink off eventual last wounds, if a knight is left with 4w after two rail gun shots you'd definitely not shoot the third railgun at it


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 12:05:30


Post by: dreadblade


 Blackie wrote:
You lose a knight every turn.... if the tau player has 4 hammerheads, assuming averages rolls and not insanely lucky ones.


Are we talking tournaments here? I very much doubt I'll see 4 hammerheads at my FLGS.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 12:38:47


Post by: Jidmah


ihockert wrote:
I'm not sure looking at the average damage for Hammerhead Shots is a great way of looking at them. Assuming BS3 a Hammerhead has a 58% chance of inflicting 10-12 wounds to a toughness 8 Knight. At BS4 it has a 49.5% chance of doing 10-12 wounds. The average isn't that useful because if the weapon hits and wounds you get smashed, but if it doesn't then nothing happens. Squads with multiple shots are going to have less skew in their results. I'm not saying the sky is falling when it comes to Tau as there is not enough information out there to make a judgement about anything.


There are already are guns like the SAG who have very similar math. A roughly 50% chance of doing nothing and a 20% chance to blow away a knight in one go.

In the end, those things never end up being played because this cuts in both directions. Losing a game and thus ruining all your chances of placing well in a tournament because your three single-shot knight killers all picked the wrong side of the coin is not an option for competitive play.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 13:11:50


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Getting past how it's technically impossible to see a list with 4 HHs, I think we can skip to the point where a Knight can bracket/if not destroy)1-2 hammerheads per turn, and maybe get bracketed themselves on the reply. Still a worthy tradeoff in my eyes.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 13:14:38


Post by: Leo_the_Rat


I don't see how it's impossible to field 4 HH. You take 3 regular slots (each with 1 HH) and 1 HQ slot (Longstrike who is also a HH unit). To my math 3 + 1 = 4.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 13:39:25


Post by: dreadblade


It depends who you normally play. Just because its possible to put together a skewed T'au list doesn't mean it's going to be commonplace. Most people don't even have a T'au army. Apart from competitive tournament players, do people really buy a complete new faction to benefit from what is probably a temporarily OP list until it gets nerfed?


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 14:06:26


Post by: Jidmah


I'd wager that most people don't even have 3 hammerheads to begin with.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 14:11:08


Post by: stonehorse


 Jidmah wrote:
I'd wager that most people don't even have 3 hammerheads to begin with.


A lot of old Tau players will have more than 3 I'd say... now how many of them have Railguns and not Iron cannons is the real question.

Hammerheads will no doubt be eating Knights for breakfast for a few months... then bam! The Knights will get a shinny all singing, all dancing new powerful Codex.

And thus the cycle of imbalance will forever continue in 40k.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 14:44:25


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Excuse my mistake, I didn't know a Long strike was a thing, and just saw 4 of a single data sheet, which made me think Rule of 3.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 16:24:25


Post by: Chaos Jim


 Backspacehacker wrote:
Dont forget, railguns are NOT the most powerful gun they have.

whats also not mentioned is the fact the hammerhead can fly, so it can hide behind stuff, pop out, with zero impunity to shooting said rail gun.

Tau basically hard counters knight lists with no real way around it. Its just a feels batman.


Exactly what I’m thinking of, and then on top of what you just mentioned the Tau player still has the rest of their entire army to shoot with.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Daedalus81 wrote:


I do imagine, however, that Rotate Ion Shields could become some sort of Transhuman for Knights. Some minus to wound mechanic, minus to damage, half damage, etc. It sucks to have to deal with this issue without a quick patch for sure.


Knights having some form of damage reduction or damage cap per phase would make them much better, but with what we’ve been seeing from new rule leaks I’m also worried that GW might make knights become the 7th edition masters of murder again.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Spoletta wrote:
Don't get scared by big numbers.


I’m worried that the big numbers won’t have another big number to limit it. That being points.
and it’s also the fact that the Tau player, after shooting the HH railguns, still have them rest of the army to shoot with.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Blackie wrote:

Eradicators spam at the beginning of 9th was much more of a threat to knights, did the sky fall down then?


Eradicators have a 24” range, the railgun has 72”.
You tell me that isn’t much more a Knight counter than eradicators.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
SamusDrake wrote:
Only thing is we're comparing 9th edition Tau rules against 8th edition rules + patches for Imperial / Chaos Knights. The situation might change when their 9th edition codices arrive...

That said, Armigers are definitely undervalued due to their mobility, are still Lords of War themselves and can now occupy objectives. Its worth mentioning that in Combat Patrols they're the only option for a Knight player; so they'll be going up against the Hammerhead anyway in that situation.

Speak of the devil; while I'm waiting for the Knight codices, my two warglaives could do with a helverin to back'em up and make up a patrol. Its a shame they don't have their own Household soliders to fill in the odd points...


The Knight codex is still a long way away, and I agree with armigers being underrated.
There are custom households you can make for your armigers.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
 stonehorse wrote:
 Jidmah wrote:


Hammerheads will no doubt be eating Knights for breakfast for a few months... then bam! The Knights will get a shinny all singing, all dancing new powerful Codex.

And thus the cycle of imbalance will forever continue in 40k.


It’ll be HH, then Knights, then whatever else GW decides to make good next.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 17:22:20


Post by: Unit1126PLL


God, can you imagine Knights with a damage limit per phase?

"Like sorry, I know you did 30 damage to me in melee, but I can only take 8 and I'm guaranteed to hit you with my Str 16 weapon that probably ignores invulns because that's a thing now."

Daemons gonna be sad.

This game is already insane


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 17:24:55


Post by: Chaos Jim


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
God, can you imagine Knights with a damage limit per phase?

"Like sorry, I know you did 30 damage to me in melee, but I can only take 8 and I'm guaranteed to hit you with my Str 16 weapon that probably ignores invulns because that's a thing now."

Daemons gonna be sad.

This game is already insane


“Yeah so about all your damage…”
Daemons are screwed if more and more factions just keep getting ignore invuln save weapons, unless they get FNP saves


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 18:35:46


Post by: Strg Alt


Chaos Jim wrote:
To the Knight players, the railgun is busted. You can’t hide, you lose a Knight every turn because the Tau player has 2 hammerheads, you can’t shoot back that well because they’ll either be hiding, or you’re bracketed so you can’t hit the broadside of a barn, or you’re dead.
This got me thinking about something I thought about awhile ago.
What if you just bring an all armiger/war dog army?
You still get to play knights, but armiger class knights don’t have the titanic keyword. So they can hide.
I’ve done the calculations and you could run 14 armiger class knights in a standard 2k point game, and then equip half of them with autocannons.
Of course you’d have to buy 14 armigers, but they’re faster, are still quite tanky, and more expendable. Plus they all have obsec if you’re running mono knights, and they all count as 5 models for objectives.
I want to know if this is a decent counter play to the railgun if you still want to play mono knights.


Many people and myself have spent quite a while building and painting our IKs. Suggesting we shouldn`t use them because an opponent can bring weapon X to the table is bad advice.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 18:44:32


Post by: Chaos Jim


 Strg Alt wrote:
Chaos Jim wrote:

Many people and myself have spent quite a while building and painting our IKs. Suggesting we shouldn`t use them because an opponent can bring weapon X to the table is bad advice.


I have also painted a few knights myself, and I’m not saying don’t play knights. I’m saying the railgun is a big scary anti Vehicle weapon Knight players now have to deal with. It’s the fact that the railgun is literally un-interactable, it’s just does damage, especially because of the new markerlight rules that GW have said will be good for HH, and the stratagem that lets it re-roll a hit roll, on top of a CP re-roll for the wound roll, on top of the rest of their entire army still shooting as well. I just don’t want Tau to become that army like admech, or drukhari where no one wants to play against them, because I have a friend who plays Tau.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 19:18:56


Post by: Void__Dragon


Knights shouldn't be factored into balance at all as a faction, which is to say that whether or not a weapon/unit/army/whatever feths them should be irrelevant because knights should never have existed as an army. I'm not an anti-LoW purist, but an army that is rewarded for playing nothing but 24+ wound T8 vehicles in a skew list is always going to be a balance issue. Unfortunately the genie is out of the bottle now and can't be put in, so knight players are going to have to accept that either the codex is always going to be competitively niche at best (basically nothing more than a gatekeeper army in tournaments without having any consistent top table viability) or it has to be redesigned in way that basically forces you to take one big knight and then nothing but armigers.

The idea of making knights only able to take like a third of its wounds in a round is so horrible it's insane tbh. At around their current price point that would be extremely toxic and frankly broken, and some armies would have no way to really take a knight out in one turn.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 19:49:19


Post by: Racerguy180


I love my knight house but if I choose to play it, I am actively handicapping myself.

The castellan wrecks stuff but often gets removed with surprising ease. I'll agree that Armigers are more fun to play and I do want to round out the 6 models I have with more Warglaives. Then a couple Moirax to run an all Armiger list.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/08 20:53:24


Post by: Dysartes


Chaos Jim wrote:
 Strg Alt wrote:
Many people and myself have spent quite a while building and painting our IKs. Suggesting we shouldn`t use them because an opponent can bring weapon X to the table is bad advice.


I have also painted a few knights myself, and I’m not saying don’t play knights. I’m saying the railgun is a big scary anti Vehicle weapon Knight players now have to deal with. It’s the fact that the railgun is literally un-interactable, it’s just does damage, especially because of the new markerlight rules that GW have said will be good for HH, and the stratagem that lets it re-roll a hit roll, on top of a CP re-roll for the wound roll, on top of the rest of their entire army still shooting as well. I just don’t want Tau to become that army like admech, or drukhari where no one wants to play against them, because I have a friend who plays Tau.

Just to make matters a little worse, Chaos Jim, the re-roll to hit from Targeting Array appears to just be a standard special rule on the Hammerhead, not a strat.

Going by the preview article, anyway. Still a CP option to re-roll one of the To Wound rolls over the course of the phase.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 07:39:13


Post by: Blackie


 dreadblade wrote:
 Blackie wrote:
You lose a knight every turn.... if the tau player has 4 hammerheads, assuming averages rolls and not insanely lucky ones.


Are we talking tournaments here? I very much doubt I'll see 4 hammerheads at my FLGS.


As I very much doubt that I'll see players losing a knight every turn .


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Chaos Jim wrote:


Eradicators have a 24” range, the railgun has 72”.
You tell me that isn’t much more a Knight counter than eradicators.


They can outflank and shoot with no penalty though, and with more shots fired they'll likely be more reliable. They're also much cheaper than hammerheads and arguably even much more resilient.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 08:05:04


Post by: vict0988


 Jidmah wrote:
ihockert wrote:
I'm not sure looking at the average damage for Hammerhead Shots is a great way of looking at them. Assuming BS3 a Hammerhead has a 58% chance of inflicting 10-12 wounds to a toughness 8 Knight. At BS4 it has a 49.5% chance of doing 10-12 wounds. The average isn't that useful because if the weapon hits and wounds you get smashed, but if it doesn't then nothing happens. Squads with multiple shots are going to have less skew in their results. I'm not saying the sky is falling when it comes to Tau as there is not enough information out there to make a judgement about anything.


There are already are guns like the SAG who have very similar math. A roughly 50% chance of doing nothing and a 20% chance to blow away a knight in one go.

In the end, those things never end up being played because this cuts in both directions. Losing a game and thus ruining all your chances of placing well in a tournament because your three single-shot knight killers all picked the wrong side of the coin is not an option for competitive play.

SAG was spammed in 8th, good argument to show railgun HH have a chance of being spammed

Chaos Jim wrote:
Eradicators have a 24” range, the railgun has 72”.
You tell me that isn’t much more a Knight counter than eradicators.

Knights can charge the HH /sarcasm

 Blackie wrote:
I very much doubt that I'll see players losing a knight every turn

Tau will be gak unless they can. I know how strong S5 can be against Knights and Fire Warriors will be AP-1. You might not even bother killing a Knight if it has 1-5 wounds left since it will die in Overwatch assuming FtGG and 5+ Overwatch is still a thing.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 08:08:35


Post by: SamusDrake


Chaos Jim wrote:


The Knight codex is still a long way away, and I agree with armigers being underrated.
There are custom households you can make for your armigers.



Indeed, we could be looking at summer before that new Chaos Knight is finally revealled. But I'm hoping that they'll go for a dual Imperial / Chaos release, maybe with a revised Imperial Knights: Renegade pack.

Have to admit that upon returning to the hobby I felt that Knights and Titans didn't have any place in 40K but in Epic, but those Armigers have made me smile. Not too big but still an intimidating sight, and working out at £22.50 each they're really good value.

Its just a shame they don't have other weapon options.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 08:12:21


Post by: vict0988


SamusDrake wrote:
Chaos Jim wrote:


The Knight codex is still a long way away, and I agree with armigers being underrated.
There are custom households you can make for your armigers.



Indeed, we could be looking at summer before that new Chaos Knight is finally revealled. But I'm hoping that they'll go for a dual Imperial / Chaos release, maybe with a revised Imperial Knights: Renegade pack.

Have to admit that upon returning to the hobby I felt that Knights and Titans didn't have any place in 40K but in Epic, but those Armigers have made me smile. Not too big but still an intimidating sight, and working out at £22.50 each they're really good value.

Its just a shame they don't have other weapon options.

There are additional weapon options for FW, you could kitbash them.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 08:27:21


Post by: SamusDrake


 vict0988 wrote:

There are additional weapon options for FW, you could kitbash them.


Rules-wise, can the non-Moirax armigers use them? That would be cool indeed!


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 08:37:44


Post by: vict0988


No, but you can just magnetize your kitbashed lightning locks on your regular Armiger and call it a Moirax.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 08:39:03


Post by: Jidmah


 vict0988 wrote:
SAG was spammed in 8th, good argument to show railgun HH have a chance of being spammed

It was spammed because you could increase the output of one sixfold by giving it the SSAG and stacking stratagems, while doubling the output of another one through the bad moons stratagem and gain re-rolls for hit, wound and damage through deff skulls. So in reality those spammed three SAG big meks had the output of 9-10 railguns and doubt that anyone would disagree that this would bad.
It also immediately stopped being spammed after being raised to 120 points, at least 20 point less than the future hammer head will be, despite not losing its damage potential.
The current SAG mek with better BS and the same gun than the one spammed in 8th still sees zero play despite being cheaper and harder to kill than hammer heads.

If you insist on taking examples from almost three years ago, from an old codex in another game with different rules and a different meta, you should at least understand why a weapon was spammed and why it isn't anymore.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 09:00:39


Post by: SamusDrake


 vict0988 wrote:
No, but you can just magnetize your kitbashed lightning locks on your regular Armiger and call it a Moirax.


But that's against regulations! I'd be told off!


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 09:33:04


Post by: Spoletta


deTox91 wrote:
So given current codex configuration, 3 HHs + Longstrike which is BS 2+ and makes HHs 2+ too with innate reroll, adding in a CP reroll for a failed wound roll, what's the odd of loosing 2 knights turn 1? Not forgetting that this still leave the Tau with 1300 more pts for the rest of the army and to pink off eventual last wounds, if a knight is left with 4w after two rail gun shots you'd definitely not shoot the third railgun at it


Let's play a game.

You bring the aforementioned HHs, and I bring 3x6 salamander eradicators with HQ support.

See who gets to destroy more knights per turn.

Skew lists have always existed. Doesn't mean that they get played and that you should worry about them.

Knights play a skew list by definition, so obviously they are in big trouble if someone makes an anti skew list tailored against them. That's the nature of that faction. You live on the fact that your opponent has to face a lot of things which aren't knights, so he won't bring 800 points in 4 shots, the same way he won't bring 18 eradicators.

Do you think that the covenant DE lists are terrified by the prospect of facing an Orrery Dnaught spam? No, because those lists are not around.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 10:29:18


Post by: vict0988


 Jidmah wrote:
Spoiler:
 vict0988 wrote:
SAG was spammed in 8th, good argument to show railgun HH have a chance of being spammed

It was spammed because you could increase the output of one sixfold by giving it the SSAG and stacking stratagems, while doubling the output of another one through the bad moons stratagem and gain re-rolls for hit, wound and damage through deff skulls. So in reality those spammed three SAG big meks had the output of 9-10 railguns and doubt that anyone would disagree that this would bad.
It also immediately stopped being spammed after being raised to 120 points, at least 20 point less than the future hammer head will be, despite not losing its damage potential.
The current SAG mek with better BS and the same gun than the one spammed in 8th still sees zero play despite being cheaper and harder to kill than hammer heads.

If you insist on taking examples from almost three years ago, from an old codex in another game with different rules and a different meta, you should at least understand why a weapon was spammed and why it isn't anymore.

I smell moving goalposts. 8th and 9th are not that different, the way terrain is used in many modern 40k tournaments alone is a huge damper on the SAG, unfortunately, HH can move 12" and shoot without a heavy penalty. The SAG can lumber around 5" and then lose 33% of its firepower, bleh in 9th.

Necron Lokhust Heavy Destroyers seem more popular than Lokhust Destroyers despite them having a third as many shots and costing 20% more per model, the extra range, S, AP and D make up for the lack of volume.

You said never OP and I said probably OP. I did not say SAG's could never be bad, I said they were spammed, all it takes is a low enough pts cost.

The BS is nice, but damage is still pretty similar to previously because of other changes. You also cannot fish for S11 anymore with a CP re-roll for the relic SAG, a Hammerhead can re-roll a wound roll, getting 200 pts of extra shooting for 1CP.

Character protection has been degraded in 9th, so I don't know I'd say that a SAG is more survivable than a HH. Yesterday I killed a unit of infantry with my infantry and then sniped the character hiding behind them from across the board with an anti-tank weapon despite that character not being the closest target because there was no unit within 3" of the character any longer. Then there is the fact that you cannot use the Grot Oiler as an ablative wound or to tank a C'tan sniper power.

I know exactly why SAGs were so good since I played 20ish games against 1-3x SAG. GW have said that HH can be boosted by markerlights, a relic railgun also isn't out of the question and Longstrike giving HH a bonus is almost a certainty.

Any unit's viability is determined entirely based on its pts-efficiency, if you have a unit that wins you the game automatically turn 1 it will still have no impact if it is 2001 pts. The main problem is how much of a glass cannon a HH is, there is no points value where it is a fun unit, it's bad game design.

If it gets a permanent -1 damage or -1 to hit from chaff launchers or whatever Tau call them then maybe it could be a healthy unit at 220-ish points. But a 13W T7 3+ Sv unit with no invuln or defensive abilities that is 200 points to account for its offense is just not fun IMO.

"Almost 3 years" is weird way to spell "less than 2 years", LVO 2020 had 8 SAGs in the top 3 Ork lists.

SamusDrake wrote:
 vict0988 wrote:
No, but you can just magnetize your kitbashed lightning locks on your regular Armiger and call it a Moirax.


But that's against regulations! I'd be told off!

What regulations? Talk to your TO/opponent before. As long as everything is clear then you'll be fine, especially in casual games if you are picking a variety of weapons and modelled them so you can tell them apart and not just one powerful loadout you can put on 9 of your Armigers.
Spoletta wrote:
Skew lists have always existed.

4x railgun HH is not specifically a Knight-counter list. Kill 8 Deathshroud Terminators, 8 Eradicators, 4 Raiders, 20 Vanguard or 5 laser chickens.

How many Vanguard or Deathshroud Terminators do 18 Eradicators kill at 24" range? Not to mention the Eradicator death ball is 800 pts without character support, that's another 150 pts that have to ball around the Eradicators to keep them working at a level where they outperform railgun HH outside 12".

People don't run 18 Eradicators because they are too vulnerable to getting bad-touched and there is not enough space to move them around and keep them hidden, not to mention they are so lethal that the meta has shifted away from the units they are best at taking out. HH moves 12" and shoots 72". You're not taking down 4 HH on turn 1. You try to bad touch a railgun HH and you'll have a bad time.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 10:41:38


Post by: Spoletta


4 railgun kill 6 DS terminators. 18 eradicators kill 6,5 before buff, outside 12" and without being salamanders.

4 railgun kill 4.6 chickens. 18 eradicators kill 12 before buff, outside 12" and without being salamanders.

Sorry but 4 HH is by all means a skew list.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 10:48:45


Post by: vict0988


Spoletta wrote:
4 railgun kill 6 DS terminators. 18 eradicators kill 6,5 before buff, outside 12" and without being salamanders.

4 railgun kill 4.6 chickens. 18 eradicators kill 12 before buff, outside 12" and without being salamanders.

Sorry but 4 HH is by all means a skew list.

Amazing how 8 unsaved wounds (18*2/1,5/1,5/2) with D6-1 damage translates into 6,5 dead 3W models. I'm not saying I cannot roll that well, sounds about average for me, but I'd be shocked if anyone else did it.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 10:53:03


Post by: Spoletta


d6+2 damage, which becomes d6+1 against DR, which means a chance of 5/6 to kill.

8*5/6 = 6.66.

I rounded to 6.5.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 11:42:17


Post by: Blackie


4 HH is much more skew than 18 eradicators, that's for sure. At the end of the day 18 gravis dudes aren't unreasonable for average SM armies, 4 vehicles might be for a tau army. Not to mention that those vehicles are single shot models, complete hit or complete miss, while eradicators have a much higher rate of fire, which makes them quite less swingy and more versatile.

Eradicators can combat squad, as infantries they can do other stuff than shooting and having their wounds split into multiple bodies and multiple squads they can really soak a lot of damage.

I honestly think that 9-12 eradicators are a pretty standard build for SM.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 12:04:14


Post by: Spoletta


At the moment eradicators are not seen as a competitive choice.

Sure, they hurt, but damage is not what the meta wants at the moment.
It wants thoughness and mobility.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 14:15:24


Post by: carldooley


Eldenfirefly wrote:
It may not be very easy to hide multiple Hammerhead gunships. Those things are huge.

Wait, really?

Oddly enough for this thread, I play BOTH armies. I started with Tau, and picked up Knights for an OPFOR. As for the OP, that was more or less my go to plan for most games; a swarm of Wardogs with a melee Despoiler in reserve.

 dreadblade wrote:
Are we talking tournaments here? I very much doubt I'll see 4 hammerheads at my FLGS.


You almost certainly WILL see 4 hammerheads in an army, at least once people start getting them. Assuming that Longstrike stays a HQ and doesn't get downgraded to an upgrade again.

But I will say that I don't like Sept locking my force - I have Farsight, R'alai and R'myr. I hate taking the same force time after time, preferring some tactical flexibility in my list construction and I'd hate to think that I am alone in this, considering how easy the Tau force is to magnetize.

 stonehorse wrote:
 Jidmah wrote:
I'd wager that most people don't even have 3 hammerheads to begin with.


A lot of old Tau players will have more than 3 I'd say... now how many of them have Railguns and not Iron cannons is the real question.


Wait... you mean that people DON'T keep their unused bits? Just as the suits are easily magnetized, so are T'au vehicles. Anyone who got the old Skyray kit can use their chassis (what's the plural?) as Devilfish, any flavor of Hammerhead, or as a Skyray (Which I'm fairly certain is ANY way that they want). In this way, I like the new statline for Smart Missiles, considering that the Recon Drone (which can fit on top of the Chassis on the turret hole - i just hope that the burst cannon doesn't swing out locking it in place). Assuming that the rules for the Recon drone doesn't change...


Oh and last shameless plug. I got a valiant that I haven't used once on the field. Would anyone be interested in trading for it? I'd be interested in a magnetized baneblade, a warden or a desecrator. https://photobucket.com/u/carldooley


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 15:05:08


Post by: vict0988


You can hide 4 Hammerheads on GW terrain which is apparently "totes balanced" according to Warhammer Marketing.
Spoletta wrote:
d6+2 damage, which becomes d6+1 against DR, which means a chance of 5/6 to kill.

8*5/6 = 6.66.

I rounded to 6.5.

24"
Assault 1
8
-4
D6
Each time an attack made with this weapon targets a unit within half range, that attack has a Damage characteristic of D6+2.

More than 12" out that's D6.

Let's just say I you were doing the math for heavy melta rifles, I don't feel like quibbling any more over this subject since it's totally possible the unit will be 230 pts and therefore bad and in any case as a Necron player I have 5 units that are particularly afraid of it and they are all bad anyway because of Eradicators and I can always just play casually and refuse to play anyone with 2+ railgun HH.

I still think Eradicators, multi-meltas, demolisher cannons, D3+3 lasers and doomsday weaponry do too much damage. So let's say I agree that Eradicators do more damage at 24" and railgun HH trade some of that damage for a lot more range, that's still too much.

 Blackie wrote:
Not to mention that those vehicles are single shot models, complete hit or complete miss, while eradicators have a much higher rate of fire, which makes them quite less swingy and more versatile.

They are twin-linked and probably BS 3+, they are hit or hit and even if you have 4 you are unlikely to get a failed wound if you use your CP re-roll for re-rolling the wound roll on one of them. Rolling 2 1s on 5 dice is unlikely and single shot makes it sound like they cannot kill 2 Deathshrouds or 4 Rangers in one shot. It's not like you cannot flub a roll for a unit of Eradicators either. Eradicators can also roll too hot, sometimes 6 melta shots is more than you need, but it's what you're getting, the possibility of doing 20 damage to a Leman Russ when you get within 6" pulls the math of Eradicators up. The extreme range on the HH and the mobility means it can shoot at unwounded targets every turn to make the most of its gun.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 15:21:39


Post by: SamusDrake


 vict0988 wrote:

What regulations? Talk to your TO/opponent before. As long as everything is clear then you'll be fine, especially in casual games if you are picking a variety of weapons and modelled them so you can tell them apart and not just one powerful loadout you can put on 9 of your Armigers.


I was being playful in my last comment, being a casual player and all.



Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 15:39:46


Post by: SemperMortis


 Blackie wrote:

As I very much doubt that I'll see players losing a knight every turn .


We aren't seeing many Knight players in competitive play atm, but when they were all the rage in 8th every single army in the game was fundamentally built with the understanding that it needed to kill a Knight a Turn. As far as 4 HHs? Most tau players I know have at least 3, it is not at all unlikely that even friendly players will purchase some more and bring them to the table. As an anecdote, I'm the only hardcore Ork player at my FLGS, as in, I'm the only one who only ever brings orkz and nothing else. When our Codex got released, the very next escalation league and next ITC events had 4+ Ork players on average, and most of these guys had 2-6 Rukkatrukkz and they weren't meta gamers They were gamers who had an ork collection and when it was the orkz time to shine they figured it would be fun to dust off the old collection, pickup a few of hte new hotness if they didn't have any yet and poof, Pro gamer move

 vict0988 wrote:

SAG was spammed in 8th, good argument to show railgun HH have a chance of being spammed


SAG wasn't spammed in 8th because it was OP, it was spammed in 8th because what else were you going to do with your HQ choices? Ork players were bringing triple battalions to maximize CP because we ate through CP like it was no ones business. We had 6 mandatory HQ slots to fill. 3 Weirdboyz and then 3 SAG Mekz, you could take a warboss if you really wanted to but they definitely weren't as good as they are now.

And as far as the SAG, it was only good because of 8th rules policies regarding force multipliers in Stratagems, something GW has noticeably changed course on and is actively discouraging/getting rid of.

I only ever took 1 SAG for the relic, but the guys who took 3 were doing it for the CP burns. 1 SAG becomes the relic SSAG from the special detachment, this gives him his own shoot twice stratagem. The other 2 use bad moonz to get their re-roll 1s and shoot twice stratagem. The Relic SAG shoots essentially 4D6 shots while the 2 non-relics shoot 3D6 shots. By Todays standard that is in fact equivalent to 7 SAG Big Mekz. A shoot twice SSAG put out 14 shots on average, with exploding 5s and 6s which averaged 6 hits a turn. To equal 6 hits a turn the current Big Mekz would need 3 turns. And how much was that 1 big mek with SSAG? 80pts. How much is a modern SAG? 110pts it also lost dakka on 5s and shoot twice stratagems, but because so many people complained that orkz had a reliable shooting platform it was nerfed into the ground

So why was the SAG spammed in 8th? Because we had 6 minimum HQ slots to fill and because they were somewhat reliable. I don't think comparing The railgun to the SAG is a fair argument. Orkz had Weirdboyz and Big Mekz as reliable/good HQ units and usually a 1 off Warboss with Da Killa Klaw.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 16:30:46


Post by: Void__Dragon


Spoletta wrote:
d6+2 damage, which becomes d6+1 against DR, which means a chance of 5/6 to kill.

8*5/6 = 6.66.

I rounded to 6.5.


Per your own math you were mathing them like they were over 12" away which means their damage is only D6, not D6+2.

Also, why are you comparing 810 points of Eradicators to four hammerheads which are atm about 605 points? Are you assuming hammerheads will have their price jacked up to be comparable? Like you assumed they would be BS4+ when doing the math in the other thread?

Your calculations appear consistently disingenuous and bluntly no one should take them seriously.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 16:56:50


Post by: Dudeface


 Void__Dragon wrote:
Spoletta wrote:
d6+2 damage, which becomes d6+1 against DR, which means a chance of 5/6 to kill.

8*5/6 = 6.66.

I rounded to 6.5.


Per your own math you were mathing them like they were over 12" away which means their damage is only D6, not D6+2.

Also, why are you comparing 810 points of Eradicators to four hammerheads which are atm about 605 points? Are you assuming hammerheads will have their price jacked up to be comparable? Like you assumed they would be BS4+ when doing the math in the other thread?

Your calculations appear consistently disingenuous and bluntly no one should take them seriously.


Heavy melta rifles are d6+2 at max range.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 17:00:35


Post by: Void__Dragon


Dudeface wrote:


Heavy melta rifles are d6+2 at max range.


Sure, and also brings the cost all the way up to 900 points. Almost three hundred points more than the four hammerheads.

I wasn't going to assume that Spoletta would actually make his comparison even more stupid, I like to assume the best in people friend.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 18:30:23


Post by: Daedalus81


I agree - it's a bad comparison, but...

As I've stated often - people vastly over-estimate the abilities of Eradicators and now to an extent Hammerheads as well.

This is a BH Ravager versus a HH using a CP for a wound reroll. The Ravager does nothing 25% of the time and the HH 20% of the time. The Ravager does equal to the HH 18%, better 5% of the time, close enough (8 to 9 damage) 9%, and worse about 44% of the time ( 4, 5, and 6 damage ).

Now since a CP reroll is just once so what is the HH without it? 41% chance to do nothing. If the Ravager rerolls a wound it does nothing 17% of the time instead. These factors will change depending on positioning and Montka and other buffs.

The Ravager is cheaper and is a very competent platform, but people don't spam them. Why? Overstacking anti-tank isn't how you win games and there's more than one way to skin a cat ( especially for DE ).

It is still a problem for Knights who have to move out of the all titanic mindset and need more tools, but that's sort of outside whether or not the HH will be a problem overall.




Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 20:28:43


Post by: Spoletta


 Void__Dragon wrote:
Spoletta wrote:
d6+2 damage, which becomes d6+1 against DR, which means a chance of 5/6 to kill.

8*5/6 = 6.66.

I rounded to 6.5.


Per your own math you were mathing them like they were over 12" away which means their damage is only D6, not D6+2.

Also, why are you comparing 810 points of Eradicators to four hammerheads which are atm about 605 points? Are you assuming hammerheads will have their price jacked up to be comparable? Like you assumed they would be BS4+ when doing the math in the other thread?

Your calculations appear consistently disingenuous and bluntly no one should take them seriously.


The 4 hammerheads you are talking about are 725 points, so first of all you have no idea what you are talking about.

No, I'm not assuming anything, and I even gave the benefit of the doubt and used the improbable value 3+ BS, just to show you how wrong you were.

The point that was made has never been on points. People were trying to show that if a Tau brings the full number of HH, then they dominate anything heavy, and I was showing them that there are factions which could have done that many times (some even did, we had a 3x6 salamander list getting results) and yet knights are still perfectly in the meta.
Yes, that other skew costs around 20% points more than that skew. Points were not the point of debate but if you want to make it part of the discussion feel free to increase by 20% the numbers of the HH, you will still discover than they can't hold a candle against other forms of AT.
They only excel against targets with a 4++, and get about on par with other forms of AT against 5++. And that's fine, that's the niche of this gun.
We can play this game with eradicators, ravagers, land speeders, chickens, devastators... name it.
You will always come to the conclusion that saying that railgun HH are somehow more lethal than what already existed is simply wrong.


Sometimes admitting that you are wrong is the right way to get out of the discussion, and there's no shame in it.
Trying to put words in other people's mouths to try to save face is instead very bad sport. Don't do it.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 20:52:42


Post by: Leo_the_Rat


I really don't understand the numbers that are being thrown around in this thread. Here is the average damage 4 Railguns do to a T8 model in a round with no re-rolls. 4 shots at BS3 = 2.68 hits. 2.68 hits wound on 3+ = 1.80 wounds. Dam is 6+d3+3(MW) [11 damage on average] = 19.8 pts of damage.

So, can someone tell me if/where I'm wrong. If I'm right then the whole 1 IK being eliminated per turn is wrong. Although I will admit that the "wounded" model is probably not going to function very well and it wouldn't take much above average rolling to destroy an IK.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 21:15:12


Post by: vict0988


Leo_the_Rat wrote:
I really don't understand the numbers that are being thrown around in this thread. Here is the average damage 4 Railguns do to a T8 model in a round with no re-rolls. 4 shots at BS3 = 2.68 hits. 2.68 hits wound on 3+ = 1.80 wounds. Dam is 6+d3+3(MW) [11 damage on average] = 19.8 pts of damage.

So, can someone tell me if/where I'm wrong. If I'm right then the whole 1 IK being eliminated per turn is wrong. Although I will admit that the "wounded" model is probably not going to function very well and it wouldn't take much above average rolling to destroy an IK.

They have an ability that lets them re-roll hit rolls, so they hit 89% of the time, BS 2+ hits 83% of the time. You are going to use a re-roll on one of your railguns. It's silly to leave it out. Saying that you won't have access to 1CP in T1/2 is silly. Longstrike is also BS 2+, that's a 97% chance to hit. An average of 3,64 hits. 2,43 wounds, very likely to include one failed wound roll, so that's another 0,67 wounds for 3,1 wounds after the re-roll. Magaera is 480 for 24 wounds, 20 pts per wound. 33 x 20 = 660. 685 pts (3x140 for HH + 185 for Longstrike + 8*10 for Drones) spent killing 660 pts. Now the remaining Tau army needs to do 340 pts using the remaining 1300 pts, which is pretty doable. But it's possible that HH are permanently -1 to hit from chaff launchers and 250 pts per model, you cannot really estimate efficiency without having the actual numbers and more importantly the remaining rules for the HH, Longstrike, markerlights and Stratagems.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 22:28:13


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


With absolutely no disrespect or shame to those who present such things (seriously. Shine on you diamonds)?

Does anyone else go a bit cross eyed when folk post percentages and that?

Perfectly happy to accept it’s just me being thick!


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 22:45:16


Post by: vict0988


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
With absolutely no disrespect or shame to those who present such things (seriously. Shine on you diamonds)?

Does anyone else go a bit cross eyed when folk post percentages and that?

Perfectly happy to accept it’s just me being thick!

I feel the same way about HS and uni math, totally get you and thanks for being respectful, this sort of math is just fun for me.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 22:51:01


Post by: beast_gts


All my local IK players have been running more Armigers recently.

...those intimidated by the T’au Empire’s new and improved railgun might want to have a sit down before finding out what their latest big gun looks like later in the week.

A Massive Battlebox Sees An Ancient Grudge Reignite in this week’s Sunday Preview - WarCom
I'm guessing the Stormsurge? Any predictions?


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 23:13:13


Post by: Void__Dragon


Spoletta wrote:


The 4 hammerheads you are talking about are 725 points, so first of all you have no idea what you are talking about.


685 actually, because I forgot the gun drones. Still over a hundred points difference.

No, I'm not assuming anything, and I even gave the benefit of the doubt and used the improbable value 3+ BS, just to show you how wrong you were.


"Improbable" lol, you're so salty my friend.

The point that was made has never been on points.


Idiotic statement. Debating anything in terms of 40k's gameplay and balance without factoring in points is useless, which I'm sure you know well. Stop trying to be disingenuous to muddy the discussion my friend.

People were trying to show that if a Tau brings the full number of HH, then they dominate anything heavy, and I was showing them that there are factions which could have done that many times (some even did, we had a 3x6 salamander list getting results) and yet knights are still perfectly in the meta.


Misleading statement, knights are "in the meta" because they are counter-meta. People don't build to be able to dunk a knight a turn because then they lose to the actual really strong armies like Drukhari.

Also irrelevant to the point I'm making, which is that you write up misleading statistics to argue in bad faith and that you should really stop doing that.

Yes, that other skew costs around 20% points more than that skew. Points were not the point of debate but if you want to make it part of the discussion feel free to increase by 20% the numbers of the HH, you will still discover than they can't hold a candle against other forms of AT.


Four rail rifles are in fact more likely to dunk a knight rotating ion shields off the board than eighteen eradicators even before the mortal wounds are taken into account. I also didn't factor in Longstrike being BS2+.

So, in the context of this thread, yes, it would appear railguns are the superior anti-tank

They only excel against targets with a 4++, and get about on par with other forms of AT against 5++. And that's fine, that's the niche of this gun.
We can play this game with eradicators, ravagers, land speeders, chickens, devastators... name it.
You will always come to the conclusion that saying that railgun HH are somehow more lethal than what already existed is simply wrong.

Sometimes admitting that you are wrong is the right way to get out of the discussion, and there's no shame in it.


It's true, if this is your backhanded way to apologize I am a kind enough person to accept it.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 23:30:01


Post by: Leo_the_Rat


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
With absolutely no disrespect or shame to those who present such things (seriously. Shine on you diamonds)?

Does anyone else go a bit cross eyed when folk post percentages and that?

Perfectly happy to accept it’s just me being thick!


That's why I broke it down the way I did. I didn't want to get bogged down in details. I just wanted the basic info and I couldn't make heads or tails of what other people were writing.

@beast_gts- The ancient grudge article is about AoS and has nothing to do with 40K.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/09 23:33:13


Post by: beast_gts


Leo_the_Rat wrote:
@beast_gts- The ancient grudge article is about AoS and has nothing to do with 40K.
It's the week ahead article and includes the quote I mentioned...


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 00:15:12


Post by: ccs


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
With absolutely no disrespect or shame to those who present such things (seriously. Shine on you diamonds)?

Does anyone else go a bit cross eyed when folk post percentages and that?

Perfectly happy to accept it’s just me being thick!


What, you don't find their ramblings amusing?
* My favorite part is always when they do their own math wrong. Happens every time in this type of thread.
* Close runners up are ludicrous claims. I think the highlight this time is the assertion that this is not a good AT gun.
72" range (terrain dependent of course), hits reliably, wounds reliably, pretty much bypasses all the targets Saves except for FNP/wound limitations, and deals out a combined minimum of 10 damage. And maybe 11 or 12 damage. Hmm. Ok, MAYBE a Lemen Russ & things with either 12w or some sort of Quantum Shielding will survive this by the grace of the Dice Gods. And Doomsday Arc, Land Raiders, & vehicles with 13+W will only be severely 'd up. Big Knights & LoWs will of course survive (though a 10-12 pt hole still hurts). Anything smaller? :(
But yeah, this thing isn't good at AT work....


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 00:50:21


Post by: Voss


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
With absolutely no disrespect or shame to those who present such things (seriously. Shine on you diamonds)?

Does anyone else go a bit cross eyed when folk post percentages and that?

Perfectly happy to accept it’s just me being thick!


My new favorite is going to have to be unlabeled tables with no context that point to a zoomed in version with completely different numbers.
That's just the best gibberish masquerading as 'analysis' you can get for the money.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 04:58:37


Post by: Spoletta


ccs wrote:
 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
With absolutely no disrespect or shame to those who present such things (seriously. Shine on you diamonds)?

Does anyone else go a bit cross eyed when folk post percentages and that?

Perfectly happy to accept it’s just me being thick!


What, you don't find their ramblings amusing?
* My favorite part is always when they do their own math wrong. Happens every time in this type of thread.
* Close runners up are ludicrous claims. I think the highlight this time is the assertion that this is not a good AT gun.
72" range (terrain dependent of course), hits reliably, wounds reliably, pretty much bypasses all the targets Saves except for FNP/wound limitations, and deals out a combined minimum of 10 damage. And maybe 11 or 12 damage. Hmm. Ok, MAYBE a Lemen Russ & things with either 12w or some sort of Quantum Shielding will survive this by the grace of the Dice Gods. And Doomsday Arc, Land Raiders, & vehicles with 13+W will only be severely 'd up. Big Knights & LoWs will of course survive (though a 10-12 pt hole still hurts). Anything smaller? :(
But yeah, this thing isn't good at AT work....


I think that no one is claiming that this is not a good AT.
The claim being made is that other faction have possessed better forms of AT all this time, so going chicken little now is a bit out of place.


Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 05:01:40


Post by: alextroy


Here are some numbers to contemplate:

A RG HH with BS 3+ firing (with built in re-roll to hit) at at T8 target will do no damage 40.75% of the time. It has an even chance of doing 10, 11, or 12 points of damage (19.75% each). So results are roughly 40% 0, 20% 10, 20% 11, and 20% 12 damage.

This means the chance to kill a Knight (T8, 24 Wounds) is (roughly):
  • 1 HH: 0%, with a 20% chance to bracket
  • 2 HH: 4%, with a 52% chance to bracket
  • 3 HH: 26%, with a 74% chance to bracket
  • 4 HH: 51%, with a 87% chance to bracket

  • So, Knight should be aware of the threat of multiple HHs, but not super worried about it either.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 05:04:19


    Post by: Spoletta


     Void__Dragon wrote:

    Bla bla bla


    You are clearly too bitter on this to have a discussion.
    No matter what I say, or what math you are provided, you won't move from your position, so just enjoy your game and keep screaming at the sky falling.

    Condensed version for everyone else:
    If you have 4++ models around then these things are dangerous, if you don't then keep going nothing is changing.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 06:39:05


    Post by: Stormonu


    Eh, why do I have a feeling that while everyone is complaining about the HH's, Broadsides will be the ones that really cause folks headaches? I think there's little doubt their weapons will be getting a boost as well, they can come in 3's per slot and two rail shots apiece (as it stands now, who knows what it will be when the codex drops).


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 07:13:52


    Post by: vict0988


     Stormonu wrote:
    Eh, why do I have a feeling that while everyone is complaining about the HH's, Broadsides will be the ones that really cause folks headaches? I think there's little doubt their weapons will be getting a boost as well, they can come in 3's per slot and two rail shots apiece (as it stands now, who knows what it will be when the codex drops).

    Perfectly reasonable, but they were fine in 8th, exactly because they come in 3s so I find it doubtful they got the same treatment, they're probably not that good at the moment because of pts and missions. The railgun HH was criminally understatted in 6th-8th. AP1 S10 was as good as it got back in the day, but then S7 AP- became the best and then S7 AP-1 D2.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 08:36:38


    Post by: RaptorusRex


    Supposedly, the Riptide is getting moved into the HS slot. So you're less likely to see these than you think.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 10:16:46


    Post by: Ordana


     RaptorusRex wrote:
    Supposedly, the Riptide is getting moved into the HS slot. So you're less likely to see these than you think.
    Only relevant if the Riptide is actually good. If they lose their 3++, which I fear will happen, and Savior Protocols goes away a 300 pts Riptide becomes a lot less attractive.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 11:24:40


    Post by: Blackie


     RaptorusRex wrote:
    Supposedly, the Riptide is getting moved into the HS slot. So you're less likely to see these than you think.


    A patrol and a spearhead allow 8 HS. Slots availability isn't an issue in 9th.

    If they become LoW than yeah, you're really less likely to see these than you think. Morkanaut/gorkanaut style.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 12:06:33


    Post by: Aenar


    Riptides have the same statline as a LevDread, if those aren't LoW I doubt the Riptide will be either.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 12:53:14


    Post by: Spoletta


    Tau already have a LoW in the dex, I don't think they will give one more.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 13:01:32


    Post by: Tyel


    Spoletta wrote:
    Tau already have a LoW in the dex, I don't think they will give one more.


    So did Orks to be fair.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 13:02:03


    Post by: Jidmah


    Aenar wrote:Riptides have the same statline as a LevDread, if those aren't LoW I doubt the Riptide will be either.


    Spoletta wrote:Tau already have a LoW in the dex, I don't think they will give one more.


    GW cared about neither of those things for orks.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 13:53:32


    Post by: Daedalus81


     Jidmah wrote:
    Aenar wrote:Riptides have the same statline as a LevDread, if those aren't LoW I doubt the Riptide will be either.


    Spoletta wrote:Tau already have a LoW in the dex, I don't think they will give one more.


    GW cared about neither of those things for orks.


    Feasible, but the 'Nauts went from 18 wounds to where they are now. Something that is 14 would be stretching it a bit, I think.




    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 14:10:37


    Post by: Gadzilla666


     Daedalus81 wrote:
     Jidmah wrote:
    Aenar wrote:Riptides have the same statline as a LevDread, if those aren't LoW I doubt the Riptide will be either.


    Spoletta wrote:Tau already have a LoW in the dex, I don't think they will give one more.


    GW cared about neither of those things for orks.


    Feasible, but the 'Nauts went from 18 wounds to where they are now. Something that is 14 would be stretching it a bit, I think.



    'Naught went from 18 to 24 wounds, an increase of 6. Riptides are currently 14 wounds. Give them the same increase of 6 wounds and they'd have 20 wounds, same as the Stormsurge, which is a LoW. All of the Spartan chassis LoWs are 20W as well, so definitely feasible. Those things are pretty big.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 14:23:16


    Post by: Spoletta


    Yeah, size wise the riptide could be a LoW.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 14:27:58


    Post by: Gadzilla666


    What size base are they on?


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 14:35:08


    Post by: Sterling191


    120 ovals. The Stormsurge is on 170 ovals, the same size as Knights.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 14:43:00


    Post by: Gadzilla666


    Aren't Wraithknights on 120s?


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 14:46:26


    Post by: stratigo


    PenitentJake wrote:
    This is because Knights don't have their dex yet.

    They'll get some form of mitigation against this attack- whether a modified FNP, and Damage reduction, or a per phase damage limit like Ghaz.

    Comparing a 9th dex to an 8th is always going to be at least a little bit busted; that's why edition churn sucks as a business model, and we'd all be better off with persistent edition based on campaign seasons system that provides small incremental upgrades and modest model releases for every faction every year.

    (PS: No, that's not saying it doesn't suck for knight players- it does. It's also not saying they have no right to complain- they do)


    Oh god can you imagine how cancerous knights will be with a -1damage reduction?



    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 14:49:45


    Post by: The_Real_Chris


     Afrodactyl wrote:
    The thing with the Hammerhead is that they're realistically only going to fire once. The Hammerheads will cripple but probably not kill one knight, at which point they turn around and blow them to bits and they don't have to worry about them any more.

    A Hammerhead is something like T7 W13 S3+? That's not going to stand up to any sort of dedicated AT fire, especially when they're the primary threat to your Knights.


    Nothing like a game where alpha strike is king...


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 15:35:37


    Post by: Daedalus81


     Stormonu wrote:
    Eh, why do I have a feeling that while everyone is complaining about the HH's, Broadsides will be the ones that really cause folks headaches? I think there's little doubt their weapons will be getting a boost as well, they can come in 3's per slot and two rail shots apiece (as it stands now, who knows what it will be when the codex drops).


    Same. Or the other "more powerful weapon", which I assume is the Supremacy Railgun on the Gunrig. If that's the case then hopefully it is just a two shot version of this. That or the Stormsurge Pulse stuff.

    The Heavy Rail Rifle on the Broadsides will very like be S10 / S12, AP6, Ignore Invuln, 1 MW, D3+3 damage. It is possible for them to be D3+6 since the old versions were both a D6 and it was just the MW trigger that was 1 or D3. Given the two shots I think GW would be insane to make them flat 6.

    With that in mind the HH has a 74% chance to do 10/11/12 to a T7 model. A Broadside would have a 66% chance to do 5/6/7, which seems fine honestly for something approaching 100 points.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 15:40:07


    Post by: Aash


     Blackie wrote:
     RaptorusRex wrote:
    Supposedly, the Riptide is getting moved into the HS slot. So you're less likely to see these than you think.


    A patrol and a spearhead allow 8 HS. Slots availability isn't an issue in 9th.

    If they become LoW than yeah, you're really less likely to see these than you think. Morkanaut/gorkanaut style.


    Edited because I’m an eejit.
    https://www.warhammer-community.com/2022/01/10/the-tau-empire-leads-the-charge-as-five-combat-patrols-prepare-to-land/


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 15:42:10


    Post by: Rihgu


    That's a ghostkeel


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 15:46:39


    Post by: Aash


    Rihgu wrote:
    That's a ghostkeel


    Ah, well don’t I feel foolish now. Oops.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 16:31:24


    Post by: SemperMortis


     Daedalus81 wrote:
     Jidmah wrote:
    Aenar wrote:Riptides have the same statline as a LevDread, if those aren't LoW I doubt the Riptide will be either.


    Spoletta wrote:Tau already have a LoW in the dex, I don't think they will give one more.


    GW cared about neither of those things for orks.


    Feasible, but the 'Nauts went from 18 wounds to where they are now. Something that is 14 would be stretching it a bit, I think.


    Nauts went from "almost playable" to "Holy Christ are these things bad" Just wanted to put that in here. If Riptides get the same shoddy treatment, I for one would be astounded.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 17:10:47


    Post by: Ordana


    SemperMortis wrote:
     Daedalus81 wrote:
     Jidmah wrote:
    Aenar wrote:Riptides have the same statline as a LevDread, if those aren't LoW I doubt the Riptide will be either.


    Spoletta wrote:Tau already have a LoW in the dex, I don't think they will give one more.


    GW cared about neither of those things for orks.


    Feasible, but the 'Nauts went from 18 wounds to where they are now. Something that is 14 would be stretching it a bit, I think.


    Nauts went from "almost playable" to "Holy Christ are these things bad" Just wanted to put that in here. If Riptides get the same shoddy treatment, I for one would be astounded.
    I could see Riptides going to 4++ with Nova Charge and saviour protocol in general going away, which would make Riptides very questionable at 300 points.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 17:47:21


    Post by: fraser1191


     Backspacehacker wrote:
    Dont forget, railguns are NOT the most powerful gun they have.

    whats also not mentioned is the fact the hammerhead can fly, so it can hide behind stuff, pop out, with zero impunity to shooting said rail gun.

    Tau basically hard counters knight lists with no real way around it. Its just a feels batman.


    Given that they ripped fly from the repulsor and impulsor(not sure about other factions). I'm hoping GW learned it's leason with flying tanks


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 18:20:52


    Post by: VladimirHerzog


     fraser1191 wrote:
     Backspacehacker wrote:
    Dont forget, railguns are NOT the most powerful gun they have.

    whats also not mentioned is the fact the hammerhead can fly, so it can hide behind stuff, pop out, with zero impunity to shooting said rail gun.

    Tau basically hard counters knight lists with no real way around it. Its just a feels batman.


    Given that they ripped fly from the repulsor and impulsor(not sure about other factions). I'm hoping GW learned it's leason with flying tanks


    pretty sure they ripped fly from these because they litterally do not fly in the fluff, they hover. Drukhari kept their flying tanks


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 18:31:04


    Post by: Unit1126PLL


    I bet Eldar will have fly on their tanks as well. They're outright stated to be aircraft as much as tanks in the fluff (i.e. the Falcon can get in dogfights with imperial aircraft).

    Tau it's less certain, but if I were GW's game designers I would leave fly. Helicopter-style pop-up attacks seem well within their "reasonable tactics" (for 40k) wheelhouse.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 18:40:07


    Post by: Spoletta


    Eldar tanks will surely have fly.

    As far as I know, the HH is more like a grav tank which occasionally can "jump" over a debris.
    Don't know if that is enough for GW to consider it a flying model.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 19:08:50


    Post by: Gadzilla666


     VladimirHerzog wrote:
     fraser1191 wrote:
     Backspacehacker wrote:
    Dont forget, railguns are NOT the most powerful gun they have.

    whats also not mentioned is the fact the hammerhead can fly, so it can hide behind stuff, pop out, with zero impunity to shooting said rail gun.

    Tau basically hard counters knight lists with no real way around it. Its just a feels batman.


    Given that they ripped fly from the repulsor and impulsor(not sure about other factions). I'm hoping GW learned it's leason with flying tanks


    pretty sure they ripped fly from these because they litterally do not fly in the fluff, they hover. Drukhari kept their flying tanks

    All of the CWE grav tanks in the Compendium kept FLY, so I'd say that will carry over to the codex models. But you can't expect consistency from gw: while all of the "small" primaris tanks lost FLY, the BIG ONE, the Astraeus, kept it. So who knows.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 19:13:33


    Post by: Afrodactyl


    The_Real_Chris wrote:
     Afrodactyl wrote:
    The thing with the Hammerhead is that they're realistically only going to fire once. The Hammerheads will cripple but probably not kill one knight, at which point they turn around and blow them to bits and they don't have to worry about them any more.

    A Hammerhead is something like T7 W13 S3+? That's not going to stand up to any sort of dedicated AT fire, especially when they're the primary threat to your Knights.


    Nothing like a game where alpha strike is king...


    Alpha strike/mitigating an alpha strike has been pretty key for a while now. Arguably for a few editions of the game.

    The new Hammerhead doesn't particularly make waves in either direction in that regard.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 19:29:25


    Post by: Stormonu


     Unit1126PLL wrote:
    I bet Eldar will have fly on their tanks as well. They're outright stated to be aircraft as much as tanks in the fluff (i.e. the Falcon can get in dogfights with imperial aircraft).

    Tau it's less certain, but if I were GW's game designers I would leave fly. Helicopter-style pop-up attacks seem well within their "reasonable tactics" (for 40k) wheelhouse.


    My guess is Fly will be removed from the Hammerhead, but kept for the Devilfish. Not sure which way the Skyray would swing, but I'd almost expect it would have Fly removed. If removed, they'll gain some convoluted rule that allows them to retreat from melee, but not bypass obstacles.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 19:47:06


    Post by: Blndmage


    Considering that they pulled FLY off the Monolith, who knows what will happen.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 19:47:56


    Post by: Ordana


    Its the same chassis. Either they all lose Fly or they all keep it (devilfish, Hammerhead, Skyray)


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 19:50:01


    Post by: Irbis


    Spoletta wrote:
    The claim being made is that other faction have possessed better forms of AT all this time, so going chicken little now is a bit out of place.

    Which is ludicrously stupid claim as no other AT gun in the game combines very cheap, flying platform, range of whole table, ignoring of ++, bucket of MW for free with each shot, comically high damage, easy 2+ and rerolls to hit if you want them, and all the other gak. This alone would make it one of the most broken weapons in 40K but to make it even worse, it also counters elite 1W infantry thanks to bucket of MW part, can reliably deal with other elites, pees on demons/custodes/tyranids/harlequins/etc, and can take on chaff to boot (just pay CP to simply force opponent to pick up 8 models off the table, no counterplay possible, from any unit of 12+ models). It's so versatile that the other 1400 points of your Tau army can be spent on countering off-meta builds because your tanks took care of all the obvious threats and you have luxury to be able to plan for unlikely contingencies with the rest.

    People pretending SM melta dudes are in any way comparable to this are either joking or simply so blinkered in their SM (or primaris) hate that their opinion about game balance is completely worthless (and that's even ignoring the fact eradicators were never in top 3 of even SM anti-tank units to begin with, even before the nerf, never mind in 40K as a whole, not that people that made them to be such boogeymen that they compare them with a straight face to such broken gak care about facts)...

    2 HH: 4%, with a 52% chance to bracket

    I really like this disingenuous argument. At first glance, 4% looks low... Until you consider 'bracket' in this context means pretty much 'dead' (the few remaining wounds can be plinked off by even softest units in Tau army, or the knight can be ignored entirely because at this point it has 5/6+ to hit back with whatever it has). ~300 points of models have 57% chance of neutralizing 600-700 point model instantly. Claiming this somehow is OK state of affairs is so warped I have no words.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 20:54:16


    Post by: Daedalus81


     Irbis wrote:
    Spoletta wrote:
    The claim being made is that other faction have possessed better forms of AT all this time, so going chicken little now is a bit out of place.

    Which is ludicrously stupid claim as no other AT gun in the game combines very cheap, flying platform, range of whole table, ignoring of ++, bucket of MW for free with each shot, comically high damage, easy 2+ and rerolls to hit if you want them, and all the other gak. This alone would make it one of the most broken weapons in 40K but to make it even worse, it also counters elite 1W infantry thanks to bucket of MW part, can reliably deal with other elites, pees on demons/custodes/tyranids/harlequins/etc, and can take on chaff to boot (just pay CP to simply force opponent to pick up 8 models off the table, no counterplay possible, from any unit of 12+ models). It's so versatile that the other 1400 points of your Tau army can be spent on countering off-meta builds because your tanks took care of all the obvious threats and you have luxury to be able to plan for unlikely contingencies with the rest.

    People pretending SM melta dudes are in any way comparable to this are either joking or simply so blinkered in their SM (or primaris) hate that their opinion about game balance is completely worthless (and that's even ignoring the fact eradicators were never in top 3 of even SM anti-tank units to begin with, even before the nerf, never mind in 40K as a whole, not that people that made them to be such boogeymen that they compare them with a straight face to such broken gak care about facts)...

    2 HH: 4%, with a 52% chance to bracket

    I really like this disingenuous argument. At first glance, 4% looks low... Until you consider 'bracket' in this context means pretty much 'dead' (the few remaining wounds can be plinked off by even softest units in Tau army, or the knight can be ignored entirely because at this point it has 5/6+ to hit back with whatever it has). ~300 points of models have 57% chance of neutralizing 600-700 point model instantly. Claiming this somehow is OK state of affairs is so warped I have no words.


    The whole premise of HH killing a few infantry models making it good at killing chaff is a bit absurd and the strat will be one HH. Killing 20 points of an infantry squad is hardly worthy of a 160+ point model.

    This is two HH shooting a knight.

    68% of the results in the table below leave the knight on 12+ wounds. 4% kills it outright. 28% leave it crippled. This changes based on when and where you can apply a CP reroll. If you have to reroll the wound then you won't be rerolling damage. If you leave it crippled there's a good chance we'll see the Knight go top bracket via strat and retaliate.

    No one is saying Knights are safe. They need tools to deal with this as do Greater Daemons. What people are saying is that the Rail Gun is by no means an absurd design for a weapon. There's other considerations that can make the HH stupid, but it's really impossible to discern where it will land and I'm betting other parts of the codex will be the bigger problem.

    Also, FYI, knights are generally sub 500 points right now, so, "600 to 700" points is a stretch.



    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 20:56:30


    Post by: Unit1126PLL


    I mean, the Rail Gun is more reliable against 1 wound infantry than d6 blast weapons (with the possible exception of 11+ man squads; haven't done the math).

    Better against 1-wound infantry than, for example, the Basilisk. And against 2 wound infantry. And, come to think of it, 3 wound infantry. And tanks.

    Huh. Well at least it doesn't ignore LOS.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 20:57:28


    Post by: Dysartes


    ...what do you think that graph is showing, Daed? As, whatever it is, it most certainly is not communicating it clearly.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 21:02:00


    Post by: Daedalus81


     Dysartes wrote:
    ...what do you think that graph is showing, Daed? As, whatever it is, it most certainly is not communicating it clearly.


    The discrete results of two HH shooting a knight. Each data point is the chance for the knight to have that many wounds remaining.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 21:04:13


    Post by: Mr Morden


     Unit1126PLL wrote:
    I mean, the Rail Gun is more reliable against 1 wound infantry than d6 blast weapons (with the possible exception of 11+ man squads; haven't done the math).

    Better against 1-wound infantry than, for example, the Basilisk. And against 2 wound infantry. And, come to think of it, 3 wound infantry. And tanks.

    Huh. Well at least it doesn't ignore LOS.


    Maybe there will be a strat for that

    It seems very powerful but the worst thing looks like it will either do huge amounts of damage or very little/nothing.....


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 21:15:28


    Post by: Unit1126PLL


     Mr Morden wrote:
     Unit1126PLL wrote:
    I mean, the Rail Gun is more reliable against 1 wound infantry than d6 blast weapons (with the possible exception of 11+ man squads; haven't done the math).

    Better against 1-wound infantry than, for example, the Basilisk. And against 2 wound infantry. And, come to think of it, 3 wound infantry. And tanks.

    Huh. Well at least it doesn't ignore LOS.


    Maybe there will be a strat for that

    It seems very powerful but the worst thing looks like it will either do huge amounts of damage or very little/nothing.....


    Which is the scary part.

    The player has much more agency over how an individual roll goes, than a group.

    Roll badly with the Demolisher and fail 3/5 wounds? Well, you can reroll 1 wound, but you can't reroll the damage then, which is only a d6.

    Roll badly with the HH and fail 1/1 wounds? Good news, you only have to reroll 1 for a minimum of 10 damage!


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 21:26:32


    Post by: Daedalus81


     Unit1126PLL wrote:
    I mean, the Rail Gun is more reliable against 1 wound infantry than d6 blast weapons (with the possible exception of 11+ man squads; haven't done the math).

    Better against 1-wound infantry than, for example, the Basilisk. And against 2 wound infantry. And, come to think of it, 3 wound infantry. And tanks.

    Huh. Well at least it doesn't ignore LOS.


    Not sure why we're comparing to a super old codex that hasn't had the rando damage removed yet.

    HH
    - 2 marines : 74%

    DL Ravager
    - 1 marine : 32%
    - 2 marines : 42%
    - 3 marines : 18%

    Dissie Ravager
    - 1 marine : 8%
    - 2 marines : 19%
    - 3 marines : 26%
    - 4 marines : 23%
    - 5 marines : 22%

    Sub in laser chickens, wazboms, buggies, etc as one pleases.

    HH will have a hell of a time ( impossible ) killing more than one of something with four wounds ( Spawn, Grots, etc ) where a DL Ravager could kill three and a Dissie could kill four ( with luck ). There's a bit more nuance than people care to look at.



    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 21:52:39


    Post by: Earth127


    A few thoughts

    When I first heard about the stats on the new railgun I thought my CK are F'ed.

    Knights will always be a skew list to an extent. If you bring an only knight list, even armigers. You risk running into AT and being in trouble.

    I don't like ignore INV. Rules that disable are usually worse than rules that enable.

    There's a lot of powercreep going on in these last codices and it's going to get out of control fast and I'm getting flashbacks to the worst days of 7th.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 21:57:11


    Post by: Dudeface


     Daedalus81 wrote:
     Dysartes wrote:
    ...what do you think that graph is showing, Daed? As, whatever it is, it most certainly is not communicating it clearly.


    The discrete results of two HH shooting a knight. Each data point is the chance for the knight to have that many wounds remaining.


    Soooo it has 100% chance of leaving it on 24 wounds? I'm sorry its still clear as mud to me, better labels would go a long way and a key what the purple lines showing.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 22:26:49


    Post by: Dysartes


    Dudeface wrote:
     Daedalus81 wrote:
     Dysartes wrote:
    ...what do you think that graph is showing, Daed? As, whatever it is, it most certainly is not communicating it clearly.


    The discrete results of two HH shooting a knight. Each data point is the chance for the knight to have that many wounds remaining.


    Soooo it has 100% chance of leaving it on 24 wounds? I'm sorry its still clear as mud to me, better labels would go a long way and a key what the purple lines showing.

    I'm also unclear why the bars for 12/13/14 are different heights - that's the bracket where one HH has wounded, so the variance should just be the D3. They should be equal, unless I'm missing something, and the bars are different heights to the naked eye.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 22:36:33


    Post by: Gadzilla666


    I find it interesting that people are freaking out that this thing blows right through a knight's invul, but no one seems to care that it also blows right through a 2+ save. Personally, I kinda like that this thing tears knights up just as easily as it does other LoWs. Knights already get enough advantages already.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 23:17:50


    Post by: Daedalus81


    Dudeface wrote:
     Daedalus81 wrote:
     Dysartes wrote:
    ...what do you think that graph is showing, Daed? As, whatever it is, it most certainly is not communicating it clearly.


    The discrete results of two HH shooting a knight. Each data point is the chance for the knight to have that many wounds remaining.


    Soooo it has 100% chance of leaving it on 24 wounds? I'm sorry its still clear as mud to me, better labels would go a long way and a key what the purple lines showing.


    No, sorry - use the left side for values. Those are the discrete values. The right side is the cumulative value ( the purple line ). So, 100% of results will leave the knight on 24 wounds ( of course ), but about 20% of those will actually be on 24 wounds, then about 16% each for 12, 13, and 14 and so on.



    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/10 23:39:20


    Post by: Voss


     Gadzilla666 wrote:
    I find it interesting that people are freaking out that this thing blows right through a knight's invul, but no one seems to care that it also blows right through a 2+ save. Personally, I kinda like that this thing tears knights up just as easily as it does other LoWs. Knights already get enough advantages already.


    Blowing through a 2+ save isn't that unique, and its also understandable in terms of the setting's physics and game rules
    Ignore Invulnerable is rare and usually attached to melee, psychic powers or other nonsense that can be countered in some fashion. It isn't just 'fast iron' from a standard, mass-produced tank gun.

    It makes the 'threat of the warp' look like a joke, because almost everyone has the tech to make a chunk of iron go really fast.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 00:03:03


    Post by: Gadzilla666


    Voss wrote:
     Gadzilla666 wrote:
    I find it interesting that people are freaking out that this thing blows right through a knight's invul, but no one seems to care that it also blows right through a 2+ save. Personally, I kinda like that this thing tears knights up just as easily as it does other LoWs. Knights already get enough advantages already.


    Blowing through a 2+ save isn't that unique, and its also understandable in terms of the setting's physics and game rules
    Ignore Invulnerable is rare and usually attached to melee, psychic powers or other nonsense that can be countered in some fashion. It isn't just 'fast iron' from a standard, mass-produced tank gun.

    It makes the 'threat of the warp' look like a joke, because almost everyone has the tech to make a chunk of iron go really fast.

    Yeah, but knights don't get their invuls from "the threat of the warp", they get it from a force field, those can be overloaded. If gw would have given vehicles like knights 2+ saves instead of invuls they wouldn't have had to write this silly rule for a gun like the railgun. Then things like daemons and psykers could have their invuls. I was specifically addressing knights, which is what this thread is about. Big vehicles like knights should fear AT weapons, and giving them rules to avoid that was a mistake.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 00:53:47


    Post by: sanguine40k


    I'm beginning to think that super heavies need to either have damage reduction higher than 1 or they need the old 1st/2nd ed rule where they made their saves on 2d6 rather than 1d6...


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 00:56:50


    Post by: Voss


     Gadzilla666 wrote:
    Voss wrote:
     Gadzilla666 wrote:
    I find it interesting that people are freaking out that this thing blows right through a knight's invul, but no one seems to care that it also blows right through a 2+ save. Personally, I kinda like that this thing tears knights up just as easily as it does other LoWs. Knights already get enough advantages already.


    Blowing through a 2+ save isn't that unique, and its also understandable in terms of the setting's physics and game rules
    Ignore Invulnerable is rare and usually attached to melee, psychic powers or other nonsense that can be countered in some fashion. It isn't just 'fast iron' from a standard, mass-produced tank gun.

    It makes the 'threat of the warp' look like a joke, because almost everyone has the tech to make a chunk of iron go really fast.

    Yeah, but knights don't get their invuls from "the threat of the warp", they get it from a force field, those can be overloaded. If gw would have given vehicles like knights 2+ saves instead of invuls they wouldn't have had to write this silly rule for a gun like the railgun. Then things like daemons and psykers could have their invuls. I was specifically addressing knights, which is what this thread is about. Big vehicles like knights should fear AT weapons, and giving them rules to avoid that was a mistake.


    Eh. I can't think of time when Knights didn't have shields (even if they weren't as good as void shields), so it doesn't seem like a mistake.
    That its a force field rather than psychic doesn't really address anything. Nothing else gets 'overloaded'- not wyches dodging or the pile of other vehicles with invulnerable saves, so... dunno what the issue is.
    Having some chance of not auto-losing your big piece to massed weenies with melta or even plasma doesn't strike me as a bad thing, and that was always the 1-round fate of any big stuff in apocalypse games. Since that can (rather absurdly) be replicated in modern 40k, it seems reasonable to keep the defensive they've had since their inception and not just randomly lose them for no reason.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 02:36:04


    Post by: alextroy


     Daedalus81 wrote:
    [
    2 HH: 4%, with a 52% chance to bracket

    I really like this disingenuous argument. At first glance, 4% looks low... Until you consider 'bracket' in this context means pretty much 'dead' (the few remaining wounds can be plinked off by even softest units in Tau army, or the knight can be ignored entirely because at this point it has 5/6+ to hit back with whatever it has). ~300 points of models have 57% chance of neutralizing 600-700 point model instantly. Claiming this somehow is OK state of affairs is so warped I have no words.


    The whole premise of HH killing a few infantry models making it good at killing chaff is a bit absurd and the strat will be one HH. Killing 20 points of an infantry squad is hardly worthy of a 160+ point model.

    This is two HH shooting a knight.

    68% of the results in the table below leave the knight on 12+ wounds. 4% kills it outright. 28% leave it crippled. This changes based on when and where you can apply a CP reroll. If you have to reroll the wound then you won't be rerolling damage. If you leave it crippled there's a good chance we'll see the Knight go top bracket via strat and retaliate.

    No one is saying Knights are safe. They need tools to deal with this as do Greater Daemons. What people are saying is that the Rail Gun is by no means an absurd design for a weapon. There's other considerations that can make the HH stupid, but it's really impossible to discern where it will land and I'm betting other parts of the codex will be the bigger problem.

    Also, FYI, knights are generally sub 500 points right now, so, "600 to 700" points is a stretch.

    I'm not sure this chart is showing what you want us to see. My mathhammers says the following for 2 HHs:
  • 0 Damage: 165
  • 10+ Damage: 84%
  • 11+ Damage: 68%
  • 12+ Damage (aka bracketed): 52%
  • 20+ Damage (double bracketed): 36%
  • 21+ Damage: 32%
  • 22+ Damage: 24%
  • 23+ Damage: 12%
  • 24 Damage (Destroyed): 4%

  • So Daedalus81, my Bracketed number isn't disingenuous. There is a significant drop-off in the chance of doing 12 damage and the chance of doing 20, with getting 12 damage being at the coin-toss level of likelihood. Failing to bracket nearly 50% of the time is not a reliable plan for dealing with a Knight, even if you have other options to try and get those extra few wounds in. T8 3+ 5++ isn't easy damage for S5/6 AP 0/-1 attacks.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 03:54:00


    Post by: Backspacehacker


     Strg Alt wrote:
    Chaos Jim wrote:
    To the Knight players, the railgun is busted. You can’t hide, you lose a Knight every turn because the Tau player has 2 hammerheads, you can’t shoot back that well because they’ll either be hiding, or you’re bracketed so you can’t hit the broadside of a barn, or you’re dead.
    This got me thinking about something I thought about awhile ago.
    What if you just bring an all armiger/war dog army?
    You still get to play knights, but armiger class knights don’t have the titanic keyword. So they can hide.
    I’ve done the calculations and you could run 14 armiger class knights in a standard 2k point game, and then equip half of them with autocannons.
    Of course you’d have to buy 14 armigers, but they’re faster, are still quite tanky, and more expendable. Plus they all have obsec if you’re running mono knights, and they all count as 5 models for objectives.
    I want to know if this is a decent counter play to the railgun if you still want to play mono knights.


    Many people and myself have spent quite a while building and painting our IKs. Suggesting we shouldn`t use them because an opponent can bring weapon X to the table is bad advice.


    Im being dead serious with this, dont play knights in 40k, play them in 30k. Knights in 30k are so much more fun.
    Knights have always been the meta checkers in the game, but with this, i dont see how they can check a tau meta.


    Automatically Appended Next Post:
    sanguine40k wrote:
    I'm beginning to think that super heavies need to either have damage reduction higher than 1 or they need the old 1st/2nd ed rule where they made their saves on 2d6 rather than 1d6...


    I mean, in my opinion.
    Knights should reduce the AP of weapons by 2 if the weapons strength is 1~4, reducing the weapons AP by 1 if the strength is 5~7, and weapon with str 8+ get their full rend.

    My big issue with knights is that, they pretty much only survive on a 5+ invuln because for some reason GW decided "Hey, lets just give AP to freaking EVERYTHING" so despite the knight having a 3+ you almost never take it. Like, in all my games with knights, i think maybe, MAYBE 10% of my saves are actually off my armor, the rest are off of the 5++


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 04:04:24


    Post by: carldooley


    I don't suppose that anyone has gamed giving knights Void Shields instead of Ion Shields?
    Say a T8-9 wound that comes back on a 4+ that has to be removed before more damage can be dealt on an Armiger, and 2-3 on a questoris?


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 04:08:32


    Post by: Backspacehacker


     carldooley wrote:
    I don't suppose that anyone has gamed giving knights Void Shields instead of Ion Shields?
    Say a T8-9 wound that comes back on a 4+ that has to be removed before more damage can be dealt on an Armiger, and 2-3 on a questoris?


    I mean at that point we are just introducing more rules to dance around the issue.
    The answer to this issue is, you should not have a massive damaging weapon that just flat out ignores invluns as a built in mechanic.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 04:16:50


    Post by: Kanluwen


    Or we could just, y'know, bring the Aegis back as a directional "unmodifiable" Invulnerable Save.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 04:46:18


    Post by: Backspacehacker


     Kanluwen wrote:
    Or we could just, y'know, bring the Aegis back as a directional "unmodifiable" Invulnerable Save.

    that would mean they need to bring facings back.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 07:15:16


    Post by: tneva82


    sanguine40k wrote:
    I'm beginning to think that super heavies need to either have damage reduction higher than 1 or they need the old 1st/2nd ed rule where they made their saves on 2d6 rather than 1d6...


    Hah that would be fun when you then have to make 20+ save per phase

    2d6 rolling worked when you had less rolls to make. It was slow in 2e already. In 9e with silly # of dices..

    Single unit of arco flagelants in, make 2d6 save roll 22 times. Fun fun fun.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 10:06:22


    Post by: Ordana


     Backspacehacker wrote:
     carldooley wrote:
    I don't suppose that anyone has gamed giving knights Void Shields instead of Ion Shields?
    Say a T8-9 wound that comes back on a 4+ that has to be removed before more damage can be dealt on an Armiger, and 2-3 on a questoris?


    I mean at that point we are just introducing more rules to dance around the issue.
    The answer to this issue is, you should not have a massive damaging weapon that just flat out ignores invluns as a built in mechanic.
    I'd argue the real issue being danced around is that Knights have no place in 'normal' 40k.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 10:21:29


    Post by: Blackie


     Ordana wrote:
     Backspacehacker wrote:
     carldooley wrote:
    I don't suppose that anyone has gamed giving knights Void Shields instead of Ion Shields?
    Say a T8-9 wound that comes back on a 4+ that has to be removed before more damage can be dealt on an Armiger, and 2-3 on a questoris?


    I mean at that point we are just introducing more rules to dance around the issue.
    The answer to this issue is, you should not have a massive damaging weapon that just flat out ignores invluns as a built in mechanic.
    I'd argue the real issue being danced around is that Knights have no place in 'normal' 40k.


    Exalted!


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 10:30:34


    Post by: Tyel


     Ordana wrote:
    I'd argue the real issue being danced around is that Knights have no place in 'normal' 40k.


    I feel bad for the people who like them - but it is a bit
    "Haha, I'm going to play an army of T7/T8 3+/5++ vehicles"
    "okay I'll bring anti-tank then."
    "Oh no, we should be resilient against Anti-Tank"
    "How about you just cease to exist?"

    The basic issue with Knights is they are inherently a skew. If they are priced efficiently they inevitably serve as a gatekeeping list that warps the whole meta.

    Metawise you can sort of try and make it work (arguably Knights are better today than 12 months ago, because people generally aren't running around with massed MMs/Eradicators) - but Knights should be annihilated if they run into massed anti-tank. Which can mean casual games are a blowout. Equally however if you run into a list with very few such weapons, it can easily be a blowout the other way.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 10:43:50


    Post by: kodos


    Knights are like the 4 Land Raider list (which was a mistake that was removed, the same as Knights being a stand alone army instead of just the support option for AM and Chaos)

    if your opponent has enouh Anti-Tank you are gone, if not, your only chance is to win by objective

    now going that Knights VS AT should not be that clear so that they still have chance, the same should be valid for Hordes VS Anti-Horde weapons, W2 units against D2 weapons, etc.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 11:17:56


    Post by: sanguine40k


     Backspacehacker wrote:


    Automatically Appended Next Post:
    sanguine40k wrote:
    I'm beginning to think that super heavies need to either have damage reduction higher than 1 or they need the old 1st/2nd ed rule where they made their saves on 2d6 rather than 1d6...


    I mean, in my opinion.
    Knights should reduce the AP of weapons by 2 if the weapons strength is 1~4, reducing the weapons AP by 1 if the strength is 5~7, and weapon with str 8+ get their full rend.


    Or maybe have GW admit that saves shouldn't stop at 2+.

    Give armigers a 2+, mid-weights 1+ and Dominus 0+. You still fail on 1's, but it means they still get a decent save versus high str/low AP weaponry.

    (A 0+ needs AP-5 to get to the 5++, meaning that only truly dedicated AT weapons would force an invuln save on a Dominus chassis)


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 11:24:03


    Post by: Spoletta


    We already have some 1+ saves in the game, and they mostly work.

    They are also good to have in the game because they offer a flaw to AP-1 weapons. Usually the jump from 0 to -1 has a huge effect on a weapon output. The more 1+ and Ignore AP1 rules are in the game, the less this is true.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 11:27:12


    Post by: tneva82


    Better not introduce 1+ save until GW fixes core rule which means 1+ save characteristic is same as 2++

    Now 2+ with +1 to saves is another thing.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 11:32:15


    Post by: Chaos Jim


    Tyel wrote:
     Ordana wrote:
    I'd argue the real issue being danced around is that Knights have no place in 'normal' 40k.


    I feel bad for the people who like them - but it is a bit
    "Haha, I'm going to play an army of T7/T8 3+/5++ vehicles"
    "okay I'll bring anti-tank then."
    "Oh no, we should be resilient against Anti-Tank"
    "How about you just cease to exist?"



    I agree knights should die faster to anti tank, but at least normal anti tank still gives them a chance to save and play the game for longer. The railgun just says no to everything the knights are, that being massive walking armored gun platforms that should be able to take a hit and keep going for a bit, they’re not the type of faction that’s supposed to just die, that’s the horde list factions job. The railgun is just not interactive, it just does stuff with no counter. The HH also has built in hit re-rolls and no reason to not spend your CP on a wound re-roll if necessary.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 11:55:30


    Post by: Unit1126PLL


    Hammerheads are hardly "massed anti-tank" since they're pretty much as good as a Basilisk (i.e. not an anti-tank gun) against non-tank targets (better against some like t5 3w). They also quintuple or more a Basilisk's AT value, but people really are underestimating how good the HH is against non tanks.

    They're not a dedicated AT platform; they're pretty good against everything.


    Automatically Appended Next Post:
    A Leman Russ Punisher against Marines does almost exactly the same as a Hammerhead that hits (4.4 wounds, 2.5ish dead Marines being generous).

    The Punisher is sort of the quintessential anti-infantry gun...

    Against 10 guardsmen, the Wyvern mortar (4d6 blast weapon) kills 4 on average. The hammerhead also kills 4 if it hits.

    the hammerhead is not a specialized anti-tank weapon


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 12:12:45


    Post by: Slipspace


     Unit1126PLL wrote:
    Hammerheads are hardly "massed anti-tank" since they're pretty much as good as a Basilisk (i.e. not an anti-tank gun) against non-tank targets (better against some like t5 3w). They also quintuple or more a Basilisk's AT value, but people really are underestimating how good the HH is against non tanks.

    They're not a dedicated AT platform; they're pretty good against everything.


    Automatically Appended Next Post:
    A Leman Russ Punisher against Marines does almost exactly the same as a Hammerhead that hits (4.4 wounds, 2.5ish dead Marines being generous).

    The Punisher is sort of the quintessential anti-infantry gun...

    Against 10 guardsmen, the Wyvern mortar (4d6 blast weapon) kills 4 on average. The hammerhead also kills 4 if it hits.

    the hammerhead is not a specialized anti-tank weapon


    I agree. One other thing to note is that Tau are pretty good against light infantry (Guard, Eldar, other Tau etc) with all their massed S5 AP0/AP-1 shooting and the railgun covers both anti-tank and anti heavy infantry really well. It seems like it's a weapon profile Tau are really going to want, to help them out against any elite heavy infantry as they can struggle there at the moment since they lack access to D3 weapons for the most part. The RG giving them 2 dead Gravis, Terminators or other W3 nasties per shot is really good for them.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 12:47:39


    Post by: Spoletta


     Unit1126PLL wrote:
    Hammerheads are hardly "massed anti-tank" since they're pretty much as good as a Basilisk (i.e. not an anti-tank gun) against non-tank targets (better against some like t5 3w). They also quintuple or more a Basilisk's AT value, but people really are underestimating how good the HH is against non tanks.

    They're not a dedicated AT platform; they're pretty good against everything.


    Automatically Appended Next Post:
    A Leman Russ Punisher against Marines does almost exactly the same as a Hammerhead that hits (4.4 wounds, 2.5ish dead Marines being generous).

    The Punisher is sort of the quintessential anti-infantry gun...

    Against 10 guardsmen, the Wyvern mortar (4d6 blast weapon) kills 4 on average. The hammerhead also kills 4 if it hits.

    the hammerhead is not a specialized anti-tank weapon


    This doesn't exactly seem a good example.

    So a vehicle which costs now 160, after the dex probably more, in the most ideal situation of it having BS3+, has a 73% chance to do what a 135 point vehicle does from Out of LoS?
    Why are you pointing the "quintessential anti-infantry gun" at something it isn't made to kill? Point at those guardsmen and see how it kills a full squad (9.5) while being T8 and 2+.
    The Hammerhead cannot compete with neither of your examples, simply because it is bad against infantry.

    The hammerhead is an inefficient AT weapon which becomes good when pointed at targets with an invul save. So good in fact against 4++ saves, that in that situation it becomes even efficient against heavy infantries.
    That's it. Let's not say very wrong stuff about it being good against infantry (apart from the stratagem obviously).


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 13:08:43


    Post by: deTox91


    The HH can also equip smart missile systems which while not overli impressive at S5 0 1 have a high volume of fire out of LoS, that plus the railgun strat makes them not awful at shooting hordes, though they'll definitely prefer pointing the big gun at 4++s


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 13:15:38


    Post by: Kanluwen


     Backspacehacker wrote:
     Kanluwen wrote:
    Or we could just, y'know, bring the Aegis back as a directional "unmodifiable" Invulnerable Save.

    that would mean they need to bring facings back.

    It really doesn't.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 15:41:40


    Post by: sanguine40k


    Spoletta wrote:
    We already have some 1+ saves in the game, and they mostly work.

    They are also good to have in the game because they offer a flaw to AP-1 weapons. Usually the jump from 0 to -1 has a huge effect on a weapon output. The more 1+ and Ignore AP1 rules are in the game, the less this is true.


    I don't believe there are any Base 1+ saves in the game? 2+ with save bonuses from things like stormshields are not exactly the same.

    As to 1+ or better saves having weird interactions, I would expect GW to clarify it at the time it was introduced to prevent people trying to abuse it


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 15:56:43


    Post by: Spoletta


    There is one model actually with a 1+ save. In AoS though.

    And in there it works exactly like a 2++, and there is a FAQ to specify that it is perfectly intended like that (the model loses armor with wounds, so it makes sense).


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 16:05:30


    Post by: Rihgu


    Spoletta wrote:
    There is one model actually with a 1+ save. In AoS though.

    And in there it works exactly like a 2++, and there is a FAQ to specify that it is perfectly intended like that (the model loses armor with wounds, so it makes sense).


    That was true in 2.0, but as of 3.0 it doesn't work like that any more. Sadly


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 16:13:19


    Post by: Backspacehacker


     Ordana wrote:
     Backspacehacker wrote:
     carldooley wrote:
    I don't suppose that anyone has gamed giving knights Void Shields instead of Ion Shields?
    Say a T8-9 wound that comes back on a 4+ that has to be removed before more damage can be dealt on an Armiger, and 2-3 on a questoris?


    I mean at that point we are just introducing more rules to dance around the issue.
    The answer to this issue is, you should not have a massive damaging weapon that just flat out ignores invluns as a built in mechanic.
    I'd argue the real issue being danced around is that Knights have no place in 'normal' 40k.


    Nah knights are fine because they act as the game meta checker, since playing knights you are playing a different game. I think if anything GW needs to lean into "Knights cant really hold an objective, and really when fielded their entire goal is win by table"
    Knights only lists are not an issue, the issue thats happening is GW is making rules that specifically gimp the one thing knight lists were meant to do, which was check the meta.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 16:44:26


    Post by: Voss


    Knights exist because GW designers thought they'd be cool, not for a 'meta check'

    They (as usual) got excited by what they could do with miniature designs and didn't give a second thought to game issues. Same reason superheavies wandered over from Apocalypse in the first place.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 16:46:15


    Post by: Platuan4th


    Yeah, pretending Knights were meant for anything other than being big stompy mechs because people love big stompy mechs is deluding yourself.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 16:48:18


    Post by: Backspacehacker


    Im not saying they were desgined to be meta checkers, im saying thats the roll they ended up filling because they were designed to be big stompy robot.

    They ended up becoming the metachecker because they run so counter to what the rest of the game is. You put a knight army down you dont play the same game non knight armies play, so it acts as a way to check the meta because lists designed for the meta end up not working as good against knights.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 16:59:38


    Post by: Platuan4th


     Backspacehacker wrote:
    so it acts as a way to check the meta because lists designed for the meta end up not working as good against knights.


    As someone who has played Knights against "meta" 9th Ed lists, I can tell you this is patently untrue. Meta lists tend to steamroll Knights because things that are good in the current meta just happen to put out enough damage to neuter, or at worst manage, an all Knight list. There's a reason you don't see Knights playing top table at events.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 17:02:47


    Post by: Backspacehacker


    And i also agree that because of GWs power creeping they have been put in a super bad place.

    Hell when they brought back the ability to drop in melta weapons in range to knights, i basically checked out of 9th. trying to survive on a 5++ is not a very fun thing to do in current 40k.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 17:21:19


    Post by: Ordana


    I'd put it like this. Armies were previously designed around being able to kill a Knight per turn, because that is what it took to beat a Knight list.

    Now with the powercreep good armies just naturally kill a Knight per turn because stuff does so much damage.

    Knights are no longer a meta check because anything that can win the in the meta naturally beats Knights.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 17:22:27


    Post by: Backspacehacker


     Ordana wrote:
    I'd put it like this. Armies were previously designed around being able to kill a Knight per turn, because that is what it took to beat a Knight list.

    Now with the powercreep good armies just naturally kill a Knight per turn because stuff does so much damage.


    And that seems pretty reasonable for what an army should be able to do, but power creep has gotten really bad, like you said, that its starting to feel like 7th ed alpha striking.



    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 17:24:42


    Post by: Ordana


     Backspacehacker wrote:
     Ordana wrote:
    I'd put it like this. Armies were previously designed around being able to kill a Knight per turn, because that is what it took to beat a Knight list.

    Now with the powercreep good armies just naturally kill a Knight per turn because stuff does so much damage.


    And that seems pretty reasonable for what an army should be able to do, but power creep has gotten really bad, like you said, that its starting to feel like 7th ed alpha striking.

    No it absolutely is not reasonable. Knights were extremely meta warping and bad for the game. Setting a hard cap on "you must be able to kill this unique model type that no one else has in 1 turn to be allowed on this ride" is very stifling to army and list variety.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 17:34:17


    Post by: Spoletta


     Backspacehacker wrote:
    And i also agree that because of GWs power creeping they have been put in a super bad place.

    Hell when they brought back the ability to drop in melta weapons in range to knights, i basically checked out of 9th. trying to survive on a 5++ is not a very fun thing to do in current 40k.


    Knights are quite solid at the moment.

    Very few top places because they are indeed very gatekeepy, but their win rate is perfectly fine.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 17:37:57


    Post by: Backspacehacker


    Right now yes i agree, knights are i think last i checked right around a 50% win rate, which to be god honest is kinda where you want them to be.

    They act as a great gatekeepy army because they act as a wrench to most meta armies which agian, you really do want in the game. No army should rule the roost and knights act as a good break up to that.

    My issue i take here is that tau seem to very much be able to not only counter knights, but do it in such an easy way. When you consider that their HH, which is not even the most powerful gun they have, is able to bracket knights with ease. Your looking at an army that can cripple knight lists with ease and, in my opinion, sets a dangerous precedent for how the rest of the codex's are going to be looking.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 17:41:06


    Post by: Spoletta


    There are too many question marks involved.

    We don't know the point cost.
    We don't know the BS.
    We don't know if it kept fly.
    ...

    This could be a huge issue as well as a non issue. We simply don't have the data.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 17:42:58


    Post by: Backspacehacker


    Spoletta wrote:
    There are too many question marks involved.

    We don't know the point cost.
    We don't know the BS.
    We don't know if it kept fly.
    ...

    This could be a huge issue as well as a non issue. We simply don't have the data.


    we do know its going to be BS4+

    I strongly suspect its going to keep fly, i would be greatly shocked if it did not go up at least 30 points.
    The one thing im genuinely concerned about here though is, marklight drones.

    However, ironically at least people will probably start buying storm surges now since those hardly saw table time, but im terrorfied as to what THAT gun will do.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 18:15:05


    Post by: Gadzilla666


     Backspacehacker wrote:
    Spoletta wrote:
    There are too many question marks involved.

    We don't know the point cost.
    We don't know the BS.
    We don't know if it kept fly.
    ...

    This could be a huge issue as well as a non issue. We simply don't have the data.


    we do know its going to be BS4+

    I strongly suspect its going to keep fly, i would be greatly shocked if it did not go up at least 30 points.
    The one thing im genuinely concerned about here though is, marklight drones.

    However, ironically at least people will probably start buying storm surges now since those hardly saw table time, but im terrorfied as to what THAT gun will do.

    We know HH will be BS4+? Was there a leak I'm unaware of?

    And you're "terrorfied" that another LoW will be able to hurt your LoW? The Stormsurge is a LoW, same as a knight, it should be able to go toe to toe with them.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 18:17:08


    Post by: Backspacehacker


    No, im not terrorfied that something will be able to kill my knight thats fine, i dont think its fine that they can do so with no impunity and no way to even have a chance to save against it.

    Feels real bad man.
    Unsavable minimum of 10 wounds feel really bad no matter who you are. Thats one shotting dreads, D princes, crippling knights, popping tanks, ect ect, and they get nothing to save against it. Its not a good answer to the problems out there.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 18:30:26


    Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


    Knights were brought into 40k because a bunch of the Execs saw Pacific Rim one too many times and got butt hurt they can't do that in GW plastic.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 18:45:28


    Post by: Platuan4th


    FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
    Knights were brought into 40k because a bunch of the Execs saw Pacific Rim one too many times and got butt hurt they can't do that in GW plastic.


    Knights have existed in the universe for decades, muh dude.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 18:46:35


    Post by: Backspacehacker


    Knights were introduced if i recall correctly. in warhammer epic.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 18:56:27


    Post by: AnomanderRake


     Platuan4th wrote:
    FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
    Knights were brought into 40k because a bunch of the Execs saw Pacific Rim one too many times and got butt hurt they can't do that in GW plastic.


    Knights have existed in the universe for decades, muh dude.


    So have the Hrud. Doesn't mean they have plastic minis.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 18:58:05


    Post by: Backspacehacker


     AnomanderRake wrote:
     Platuan4th wrote:
    FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
    Knights were brought into 40k because a bunch of the Execs saw Pacific Rim one too many times and got butt hurt they can't do that in GW plastic.


    Knights have existed in the universe for decades, muh dude.


    So have the Hrud. Doesn't mean they have plastic minis.


    You are right.

    THEY HAD PEWTER MINIS!


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 19:00:53


    Post by: Dysartes


    There were also plastic Knights Paladin in the Titan Legions starter set - and at least two other variants in metal not shown on that page.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 19:04:12


    Post by: Daedalus81


     Gadzilla666 wrote:

    Yeah, but knights don't get their invuls from "the threat of the warp", they get it from a force field, those can be overloaded. If gw would have given vehicles like knights 2+ saves instead of invuls they wouldn't have had to write this silly rule for a gun like the railgun. Then things like daemons and psykers could have their invuls. I was specifically addressing knights, which is what this thread is about. Big vehicles like knights should fear AT weapons, and giving them rules to avoid that was a mistake.


    I don't think this is a direct address to knights. It's just another weapon in the panoply of tools. Eldar appear to be getting a similar treatment.

    At some point we'll probably see more phase limited damage or half damage units -- I can see Greater Daemons picking one of those up.


    Automatically Appended Next Post:
     alextroy wrote:
    I'm not sure this chart is showing what you want us to see. My mathhammers says the following for 2 HHs:
  • 0 Damage: 165
  • 10+ Damage: 84%
  • 11+ Damage: 68%
  • 12+ Damage (aka bracketed): 52%
  • 20+ Damage (double bracketed): 36%
  • 21+ Damage: 32%
  • 22+ Damage: 24%
  • 23+ Damage: 12%
  • 24 Damage (Destroyed): 4%

  • So Daedalus81, my Bracketed number isn't disingenuous. There is a significant drop-off in the chance of doing 12 damage and the chance of doing 20, with getting 12 damage being at the coin-toss level of likelihood. Failing to bracket nearly 50% of the time is not a reliable plan for dealing with a Knight, even if you have other options to try and get those extra few wounds in. T8 3+ 5++ isn't easy damage for S5/6 AP 0/-1 attacks.


    No that pretty much aligns with my considerations. 52% of results put the knight in a single bracket or better. 44% puts it on two brackets and if it doesn't get tagged by something else it will go top bracket via strat. And only 4% is a wipe.

    Of course this is all very sterile and doesn't consider CP rerolls, traits, etc.


    Automatically Appended Next Post:
     Ordana wrote:
    I'd put it like this. Armies were previously designed around being able to kill a Knight per turn, because that is what it took to beat a Knight list.

    Now with the powercreep good armies just naturally kill a Knight per turn because stuff does so much damage.

    Knights are no longer a meta check because anything that can win the in the meta naturally beats Knights.


    Ain't nobody cleaning knights out from range with current lists. The number of anti-tank weapons is waaaaay lower than people think. Meta lists don't beat Knights by straight up killing them unless it's Orks.

    Knights have a 49% 6 week win rate right now.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 19:19:27


    Post by: kodos


    so, because Knights have been an Epic for decades and there were Minis for them

    I guess the Codex Warlord Titans will be next, because if this is the reason why we have Knights in 40k (and not just because some guy saw a movie or game trailer and thought it would be cool to have such models in 40k), there is no reason why they should not get their own Codex


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 19:26:44


    Post by: Backspacehacker


    I mean, they already do have rules in 40k, just they cost a lot of points to field.

    And they do already have their own "codex" the imperial armor.

    Besides the entire point of that was, someone was saying that they only added knights because someone saw a movie, and that was just an objectively false statement because knights existed in lore for decades.

    No one is arguing over if that justifies a codex, or does not justify a codex. That an entirely different point.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 19:41:40


    Post by: kodos


    this is exactly the point, while Knights are in the setting for a very long time, there is no real reason why they are in regular 40k outside the niche of Imperial Armour, not even talking about why they are their own army

    there is no real reason for outside "someone saw something similar and wanted it to have in 40k"

    it is in 40k because it was there in Epic is no reason, otherwise we would see much more stuff coming back, so there is a different one not related to anything mentioned above


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 19:50:26


    Post by: Backspacehacker


    Ok so here is the counter point to that.

    Why do they not belong in regular 40k?
    "someone saw something similar and wanted it to have in 40k" as an argument for why they are in there, has just as much merit as me saying "GW dug through their old lore and said hey why the hell not, lets add knights back into the mix." We dont know the real reason as to why they did it, we are jsut speculating.

    The fit perfectly fine into the game, just like if someone really wanted to, they can run 4 baneblades, and currently they are not broken, they are at a ~50% win rate.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 19:54:48


    Post by: Platuan4th


     kodos wrote:
    , otherwise we would see much more stuff coming back,


    We ARE. Between FW and mainline GW, we've gotten a huge number of models that are references/reduxes to models of old from other 40K based games and outdated eras. Horus Heresy literally has models based on the freaking Space Crusade Dreadnoughts.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 19:57:35


    Post by: Backspacehacker


    Dont forget the custodes terminator armor is old blanch artwork as well.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 20:07:21


    Post by: Mr Morden


    Knights are fantastic models - must be why I have five of them


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 20:13:41


    Post by: Backspacehacker


     Mr Morden wrote:
    Knights are fantastic models - must be why I have five of them


    like wise, i got 4 painted, a lancer i need to get off my rear and build, and then scattered around my hobby room like 4 or 5 armigers.

    Did a big commission for a friend where i painted, and im not exaggerating, about 10+ chaos knights' for him, in white x.x

    That alone drained me from wanting to put together my lance.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 20:13:50


    Post by: kodos


     Platuan4th wrote:
     kodos wrote:
    , otherwise we would see much more stuff coming back,


    We ARE. Between FW and mainline GW, we've gotten a huge number of models that are references/reduxes to models of old from other 40K based games and outdated eras. Horus Heresy literally has models based on the freaking Space Crusade Dreadnoughts.

    cool for HH, but which vehicles are coming back to 40k?


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 20:22:11


    Post by: carldooley


    Out of curiosity, who has a 'centerpiece model' for their army?

    Knights I can understand as centerpiece models, and moved to today where people want just those models to make up their force.

    Heck, Tau have those same issues - how many people have their Stormsurge survive past turn 1?


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 20:26:12


    Post by: RaptorusRex


     kodos wrote:
     Platuan4th wrote:
     kodos wrote:
    , otherwise we would see much more stuff coming back,


    We ARE. Between FW and mainline GW, we've gotten a huge number of models that are references/reduxes to models of old from other 40K based games and outdated eras. Horus Heresy literally has models based on the freaking Space Crusade Dreadnoughts.

    cool for HH, but which vehicles are coming back to 40k?


    Literally every SM "relic" vehicle.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 20:29:32


    Post by: Backspacehacker


     kodos wrote:
     Platuan4th wrote:
     kodos wrote:
    , otherwise we would see much more stuff coming back,


    We ARE. Between FW and mainline GW, we've gotten a huge number of models that are references/reduxes to models of old from other 40K based games and outdated eras. Horus Heresy literally has models based on the freaking Space Crusade Dreadnoughts.

    cool for HH, but which vehicles are coming back to 40k?


    Um anything that can be used in HH can be taken in 40k for SM pretty much.

    The custodes were an additional army that was added from the old lore. Tzangoors in 40k were technically a throw back.

    GW dips into the their lore from the long back ago quite often.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 20:29:58


    Post by: carldooley


     RaptorusRex wrote:
    Literally every SM "relic" vehicle.


    Not to beat a dead horse, but everything available to non-primaris SM should be fieldable by CSM. Including all the 30k jank.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 20:31:17


    Post by: Backspacehacker


     carldooley wrote:
    Out of curiosity, who has a 'centerpiece model' for their army?

    Knights I can understand as centerpiece models, and moved to today where people want just those models to make up their force.

    Heck, Tau have those same issues - how many people have their Stormsurge survive past turn 1?


    Thats how my knights started, and its the issue of having big center piece models, you cant just have one. Because if you have 1, you are going to loose it turn one. So you need to end up taking 2, but then at that point, you might as well take 3 of them because you are gonna wanna expereince the full power of it, and at that point, might as well just run a pure knight list.

    I do kinda wish the knight army was expanded on though so it could be more of a knight house with supporting milita units as well.


    Automatically Appended Next Post:
     carldooley wrote:
     RaptorusRex wrote:
    Literally every SM "relic" vehicle.


    Not to beat a dead horse, but everything available to non-primaris SM should be fieldable by CSM. Including all the 30k jank.


    agree. WTB Tsons psyker dread in 40k


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 20:36:42


    Post by: Platuan4th


     carldooley wrote:
     RaptorusRex wrote:
    Literally every SM "relic" vehicle.


    Not to beat a dead horse, but everything available to non-primaris SM should be fieldable by CSM. Including all the 30k jank.


    The vast majority of Marine "30K jank" IS available to CSM.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 20:38:20


    Post by: Ordana


     Backspacehacker wrote:
    Ok so here is the counter point to that.

    Why do they not belong in regular 40k?
    "someone saw something similar and wanted it to have in 40k" as an argument for why they are in there, has just as much merit as me saying "GW dug through their old lore and said hey why the hell not, lets add knights back into the mix." We dont know the real reason as to why they did it, we are jsut speculating.

    The fit perfectly fine into the game, just like if someone really wanted to, they can run 4 baneblades, and currently they are not broken, they are at a ~50% win rate.
    Because 40k portraits relatively small scale battles, Super Heavy's (and Flyers) don't fit into that scale. Especially not armies of them.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 20:39:28


    Post by: Backspacehacker


     Ordana wrote:
     Backspacehacker wrote:
    Ok so here is the counter point to that.

    Why do they not belong in regular 40k?
    "someone saw something similar and wanted it to have in 40k" as an argument for why they are in there, has just as much merit as me saying "GW dug through their old lore and said hey why the hell not, lets add knights back into the mix." We dont know the real reason as to why they did it, we are jsut speculating.

    The fit perfectly fine into the game, just like if someone really wanted to, they can run 4 baneblades, and currently they are not broken, they are at a ~50% win rate.
    Because 40k portraits relatively small scale battles, Super Heavy's (and Flyers) don't fit into that scale. Especially not armies of them.


    Why and who says 40k is small battle scale? nothing anywhere mentions its small scale battle.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 20:44:34


    Post by: Ordana


     Backspacehacker wrote:
     Ordana wrote:
     Backspacehacker wrote:
    Ok so here is the counter point to that.

    Why do they not belong in regular 40k?
    "someone saw something similar and wanted it to have in 40k" as an argument for why they are in there, has just as much merit as me saying "GW dug through their old lore and said hey why the hell not, lets add knights back into the mix." We dont know the real reason as to why they did it, we are jsut speculating.

    The fit perfectly fine into the game, just like if someone really wanted to, they can run 4 baneblades, and currently they are not broken, they are at a ~50% win rate.
    Because 40k portraits relatively small scale battles, Super Heavy's (and Flyers) don't fit into that scale. Especially not armies of them.


    Why and who says 40k is small battle scale? nothing anywhere mentions its small scale battle.
    Look at what a typical army contains, a few space marine squads and assorted vehicles? That's not a major battle, thats a small scale battle (I would call it a Skirmish but that might be confusing with Skirmish games being a thing, which 40k clearly isnt)


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 20:46:11


    Post by: beast_gts


     Backspacehacker wrote:
    Um anything that can be used in HH can be taken in 40k for SM pretty much.
    Off the top of my head the jetbikes, Arquitor(?) & Sabre don't have 40K rules, plus a load of the Legion-specific stuff like the White Scars Speeders.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 20:48:04


    Post by: carldooley


     Backspacehacker wrote:
    Why and who says 40k is small battle scale? nothing anywhere mentions its small scale battle.


    If you want small scale battles, feel free to run a Combat Patrol. Heck, recently I ran a 220(?) point Tau army on account that an opponent got the Necrons from the Recruit Edition and wanted a game.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 20:50:21


    Post by: Backspacehacker


    Thats according to you.
    in a 2k list i can fit well close to
    100 guardsmen if i really wanted to.
    and like 5 russ battle tanks, it would not be a good list but you can

    100 units and 5 tanks does not sound very small scale to me.
    And thats the issue, its not small to me, to you it might be, to me its not.

    So agian in a game where you have massive alien creatures and vehicles, how is a knight out of place that much?
    Do think things like magnus and mortarian should not be there either?


    i have never seen any real good argument as to why x can not be included into 40k regular games other then "Well they just should not be included because they dont belong."
    If they are pointed correctly. there is no reason for them not to be in the game outside of literally being physically unable to fit them to the table.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 20:56:02


    Post by: beast_gts


     carldooley wrote:
    Not to beat a dead horse, but everything available to non-primaris SM should be fieldable by CSM. Including all the 30k jank.
    There used to be fluff reasons for CSM not having access to certain things - Land Speeder's grav systems degraded quickly in the warp/eye, they didn't have the equipment to recover drop pods after the battle (and could just teleport anyway), or just that X was a post 30k thing. I don't think they've touched on it recently, and it wouldn't apply to renegades who've recently turned...


    Automatically Appended Next Post:
     Backspacehacker wrote:
    Why and who says 40k is small battle scale? nothing anywhere mentions its small scale battle.
    Rogue Trader was designed for a squad or two on each side - The Battle of the Farm example was one squad of Marines against two of Orks. The intended size has grown across editions.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/11 21:25:02


    Post by: kodos


     Backspacehacker wrote:
    Why and who says 40k is small battle scale? nothing anywhere mentions its small scale battle.

    the rules, whatever is the smallest tactical unit in the game defines the scale of said game and for 40k the smallest tactical unit is the (fire-) team hence it is a small scale (pitched) battle


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/12 04:02:45


    Post by: OneBoxForOptimism


    There was a fun Chaos Knights list that did well at a recent tourney as per the OP suggestion.

    One Maegera and 8 regular wardogs/ 2 Moirax, all with traits for movement and rerolls. I think they made top 10. Wardogs kitted melta/chain and Moirax with lightning

    1900 points with 100 left over for summoning on a Moirax character.

    As a Tau player I'm honestly not looking forward to a castle/gunline book and hope we can interact in more phases of the game with this new codex


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/12 07:50:00


    Post by: tneva82


     Backspacehacker wrote:

    we do know its going to be BS4+


    Do we? Has there been leak showing it's BS is going to be lowered? Haven't seen any leaks of stats besides what GW has shown and none has shown hammerhead BS(which is 3+ with reroll atm)


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/12 14:43:28


    Post by: Captain Joystick


     Backspacehacker wrote:
    Thats according to you.
    in a 2k list i can fit well close to
    100 guardsmen if i really wanted to.
    and like 5 russ battle tanks, it would not be a good list but you can

    100 units and 5 tanks does not sound very small scale to me.
    And thats the issue, its not small to me, to you it might be, to me its not.

    So agian in a game where you have massive alien creatures and vehicles, how is a knight out of place that much?
    Do think things like magnus and mortarian should not be there either?


    i have never seen any real good argument as to why x can not be included into 40k regular games other then "Well they just should not be included because they dont belong."
    If they are pointed correctly. there is no reason for them not to be in the game outside of literally being physically unable to fit them to the table.


    100 guardsmen and five tanks begins to approach what is considered a 'large battle' in the game of 40k, but doesn't come close to the definition in the lore of the setting. Our own world has seen battles where hundreds of thousands of men and thousands of tanks vied to capture a single city over the course of a months long engagement, these figures (at least nominally) pale in comparison to 40k's lore.

    The general workaround for this kind of problem is the concession that your game on the tabletop typically represents some obscure section of the front where the fighting is thick, but forces are densely distributed enough to be roughly equal in fighting strength - too close and minute a slice for factors like relative force strength, logistical support, and other macro-scale influences on the overall battle outcome to factor.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 14:33:24


    Post by: Aenar


    Now I'm curious to read how flat dmg 12 on the big stormsurge gun is going to be the end of all 40K



    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 14:35:15


    Post by: Rihgu


    no portion is mortal wounds, barely does more damage than the hammerhead railgun in most cases (minimum 10, max of 12 vs flat 12), 24" range (which is almost a relevantly short range!) and doesn't ignore invuln saves.

    This is exactly the kind of unproblematic (read: bad) weapon people have been lamenting since 8e began.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 14:36:32


    Post by: jaredb


    24" range and lack of inv. Busting ability definitely reigns that one in lol.

    I remember it was a strength destroyer weapon back when it was introduced in (6th? 7th?).


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 14:46:10


    Post by: Daedalus81


    Daaaaamn. This is way more scary. I am curious at how easy it will be to drain T'au by putting incidental shots into counterfire models. It's certainly a mental game that has to be backed up by sufficient threats.



    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 14:49:11


    Post by: catbarf


     Backspacehacker wrote:
    100 units and 5 tanks does not sound very small scale to me.
    And thats the issue, its not small to me, to you it might be, to me its not.


    Look at the art in your codex and tell me if the battles look like they involve a total of 100 guys and 5 tanks on each side.

    In the real world, that's not even a full infantry company, reinforced by an armored platoon, and their engagement would be a minor skirmish, not even a 'battle'. It's not a big enough unit to have organic air support or artillery. A fight at this scale really shouldn't involve either- an Imperial Guard company commander is not going to have aircraft, superheavy tanks, or division-level artillery directly under his command. That's just not how the Guard is structured.

    To justify the force composition we see in 40K you basically have to assume you're playing a small part of a much larger battle, but with major strategic assets allocated to this particular skirmish for some reason. You're not playing the Battle of Stalingrad, you're playing Pavlov's House, except there's a King Tiger there.

    Epic is a better representation of the scale of 40K lore, and operates at a game scale where things like superheavies, aircraft, and long-range artillery fit more organically.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 15:02:20


    Post by: carldooley


    Spoiler:
     Aenar wrote:
    Now I'm curious to read how flat dmg 12 on the big stormsurge gun is going to be the end of all 40K



    It seems usable now. Personally I kept to the Pulse Driver Cannon as I prefer range. I generally always take the ATS & Shield generator, and unless the stabilization system is deployed, I will almost certainly use the dispersed shot - I prefer more shots to less.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 15:22:00


    Post by: Thadin


    The lack of invuln busting does make it seem a little lacking compared to a railgun, and will probably continue to once points are known... But, the Heavy 2 does make it's shots more reliable... Unless you can bring two Railguns per Pulse Blastcannon, then the better choice is obvious.

    I like the dispersed shots. Good profile.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 15:22:09


    Post by: Ordana


    People will shout at the 12D but that dispersed profile is looking much better to me. Good range, strength is still ludicrous and 4D.

    Sure its AP -2 but 2+/4++ or 3+/5++ is not an unusual defensive profile


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 15:26:10


    Post by: Tyel


    As said - it feels like bad design because its doubling down on "get lucky, your opponents stuff disappears, get unlucky it does precisely nothing".
    Less with dispersed as people say - but still.

    Oh well. Can't wait to see what they do with Volcano weapons. "Roll a dice, on a 4+ just remove your opponents unit".


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 15:33:47


    Post by: Rihgu


    Tyel wrote:
    As said - it feels like bad design because its doubling down on "get lucky, your opponents stuff disappears, get unlucky it does precisely nothing".
    Less with dispersed as people say - but still.

    Oh well. Can't wait to see what they do with Volcano weapons. "Roll a dice, on a 4+ just remove your opponents unit".


    Heyyy, bringing D-Strength weapons back!


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 15:34:21


    Post by: Ordana


    Tyel wrote:
    As said - it feels like bad design because its doubling down on "get lucky, your opponents stuff disappears, get unlucky it does precisely nothing".
    Less with dispersed as people say - but still.

    Oh well. Can't wait to see what they do with Volcano weapons. "Roll a dice, on a 4+ just remove your opponents unit".
    You say that as if its preposterous but that is literally what Str D weapons were in 7th. (not saying that was a good thing but 40k has already had this.)


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 15:46:37


    Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


    As Custodes, this is hilarious. We get 2d weapons, while Mutants with ramshackle hammers made from rebar get 3d weapons, and Tau are getting this stupidity. Can Custodes get their old Tank and Storm cannon profiles back now please?


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 15:52:44


    Post by: chaos0xomega


     catbarf wrote:
     Backspacehacker wrote:
    100 units and 5 tanks does not sound very small scale to me.
    And thats the issue, its not small to me, to you it might be, to me its not.


    Look at the art in your codex and tell me if the battles look like they involve a total of 100 guys and 5 tanks on each side.

    In the real world, that's not even a full infantry company, reinforced by an armored platoon, and their engagement would be a minor skirmish, not even a 'battle'. It's not a big enough unit to have organic air support or artillery. A fight at this scale really shouldn't involve either- an Imperial Guard company commander is not going to have aircraft, superheavy tanks, or division-level artillery directly under his command. That's just not how the Guard is structured.

    To justify the force composition we see in 40K you basically have to assume you're playing a small part of a much larger battle, but with major strategic assets allocated to this particular skirmish for some reason. You're not playing the Battle of Stalingrad, you're playing Pavlov's House, except there's a King Tiger there.

    Epic is a better representation of the scale of 40K lore, and operates at a game scale where things like superheavies, aircraft, and long-range artillery fit more organically.


    He said 100 *units*, not 100 *guys*. 100 *units* is not a company, depending on what you mean by "units" you're probably talking somewhere between a battalion and a brigade in size, which could (and likely would) have access to at least some, if not all of the organic assets you're clamoring on about depending on the organization of the guard unit in question.

    Also, your perception of what constitutes a battle is flawed. By definition, a battle is "an occurrence of combat in warfare between opposing military units of any number or size that is well defined in duration, area, and force commitment." Two companies clashing can certainly constitute a battle, arguably this is more or less typical for what might constitute a battle in the modern war especially in lower intensity conflict. Given how wide unit frontages have become and the extremely large areas of operation that very small units are expected to cover in the modern day on what are termed "empty battlefields" for a fairly good reason, its not outside of the realm of reality for two company sized formations to enter into a discrete combat action that would be termed a battle.

    A King Tiger does not constitute a "strategic asset" by any sense of the definition of the term.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 15:54:12


    Post by: Tyel


    Rihgu wrote:
    Heyyy, bringing D-Strength weapons back!


     Ordana wrote:
    You say that as if its preposterous but that is literally what Str D weapons were in 7th. (not saying that was a good thing but 40k has already had this.)


    Fair point.
    I try and forget the situation in 7th.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 16:17:11


    Post by: Voss


    https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/180/802874.page#11288820

    Full article.
    -Gun

    -movement phase *action to get reroll hits in the next shooting phase

    - Strat for changing incoming damage to 1, because shooting projectiles, laser beams or pieces of dark matter out of the air.



    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 16:22:46


    Post by: Daedalus81


    FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
    As Custodes, this is hilarious. We get 2d weapons, while Mutants with ramshackle hammers made from rebar get 3d weapons, and Tau are getting this stupidity. Can Custodes get their old Tank and Storm cannon profiles back now please?


    Custodes has some monster gak now. Trajan can take a Rail Gun to the face, D3+3 salvo launchers on bikes with W5, turn off ob-sec, all custodes infantry is ob-sec ( INCLUDING characters ) and nearly fearless, and can teleport a captain into combat on your opponents turn....to name a few things.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 16:25:42


    Post by: Nevelon


    So to anchor you need to give up that turn’s shooting for re-rolls on subsequent turns? Unless you have a trick that lets you shoot/act at the same time?

    Seems situational.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 16:28:04


    Post by: Tyran


     Nevelon wrote:
    So to anchor you need to give up that turn’s shooting for re-rolls on subsequent turns? Unless you have a trick that lets you shoot/act at the same time?

    Seems situational.

    There is probably a "shoot while performing an action" rule somewhere, all 9th factions have it.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 16:28:48


    Post by: catbarf


    chaos0xomega wrote:
    He said 100 *units*, not 100 *guys*.


    No, he said 100 Guardsmen at 2K points. Read the post I replied to, thanks.

    chaos0xomega wrote:
    Given how wide unit frontages have become


    Not in 40K, where the battlefield is a few hundred meters wide. We're not simulating COIN operations or maneuver warfare in Siberia. 40K is company-sized actions in space-WW2.

    chaos0xomega wrote:
    A King Tiger does not constitute a "strategic asset" by any sense of the definition of the term.


    And yet German infantry company commanders didn't have King Tigers in their TOE, so it's a distinction without a relevant difference.

    Please go be pointlessly pedantic somewhere else.



    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 16:28:53


    Post by: Rihgu


     Nevelon wrote:
    So to anchor you need to give up that turn’s shooting for re-rolls on subsequent turns? Unless you have a trick that lets you shoot/act at the same time?

    Seems situational.

    The action completes at the beginning of your shooting phase. You only give up moving to use it.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 16:31:14


    Post by: Nevelon


     Tyran wrote:
     Nevelon wrote:
    So to anchor you need to give up that turn’s shooting for re-rolls on subsequent turns? Unless you have a trick that lets you shoot/act at the same time?

    Seems situational.

    There is probably a "shoot while performing an action" rule somewhere, all 9th factions have it.


    Do they? And are they tied to specific units you’s expect to be able to do that sort of thing, or blanket rules?

    Honestly asking, not well versed in every codex. I know there are upgrades in Crusade play, not sure about matched.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 16:43:40


    Post by: VladimirHerzog


     Nevelon wrote:
     Tyran wrote:
     Nevelon wrote:
    So to anchor you need to give up that turn’s shooting for re-rolls on subsequent turns? Unless you have a trick that lets you shoot/act at the same time?

    Seems situational.

    There is probably a "shoot while performing an action" rule somewhere, all 9th factions have it.


    Do they? And are they tied to specific units you’s expect to be able to do that sort of thing, or blanket rules?

    Honestly asking, not well versed in every codex. I know there are upgrades in Crusade play, not sure about matched.



    If a unit is destroyed, makes a Normal Move, Advances, Falls Back, attempts to manifest a psychic power, declares a charge, performs a Heroic Intervention or makes any attacks with ranged weapons after it has started to perform an action but before that action is completed, that action is failed.



    From the core rules. So yeah, stormsurge only gives up its movement to get rerolls. Probably worded that way instead of a simpler "if you didnt move, you reroll" so that montka doesnt stack with it


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 16:52:06


    Post by: Nevelon


    Ah, my bad. I was thinking next turn’s shooting phase. But it just says the action last until the next one. So just don’t move, get to shoot better. Unless something happens to cancel the action. Which should be rare in your own movement phase.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 17:07:34


    Post by: pumaman1


    All of this "woe is me" panic about a 1 phase of play faction, as if we aren't going to see huge changes like the sisters of battle got for bloody rose in the "seasons of warhammer" nonsense, applied to most the other older factions


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 17:12:16


    Post by: stonehorse


     Aenar wrote:
    Now I'm curious to read how flat dmg 12 on the big stormsurge gun is going to be the end of all 40K



    If there is a shoot twice Stratagem that can be used on this thing... ouch!

    24" range, lack of Mortal Wounds, and no invulnerability bypassing shenanigans do reign this one in a bit. Still against melee or short ranges foes this is going to be a great counter to any big things... Greater Deamons, Tervigon, etc.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 17:29:30


    Post by: AnomanderRake


     Aenar wrote:
    Now I'm curious to read how flat dmg 12 on the big stormsurge gun is going to be the end of all 40K...


    I mean, if units with "RFP a vehicle a turn" haven't killed the game for you by now I fail to see how piling more damage creep on is going to make that much difference. The game right now feels to me like everyone you play against has the 7e Eldar book and is playing D-spam.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 17:35:00


    Post by: chaos0xomega


    Heh, Eldar broke the game in 7e so hard, so the solution to fixing the game was to make everyone else also be Eldar.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 17:36:35


    Post by: Voss


    Dispersed shot is better against greater daemons. And DE transports and heavy infantry. And a lot of things, really.

    Once you factor in invulnerable saves and how S16 is meaningless against anything below T7, you're better off sitting back and blasting.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 17:48:50


    Post by: Unit1126PLL


    Yeah. Even with 2 shots, not impressed compared to HH railgun. It doesn't ignore invulns.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 18:33:57


    Post by: dreadblade


    These new T'au knight killers make me optimistic that the new Imperial and Chaos Knights codexes will have some interesting buffs...


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 18:35:22


    Post by: Some_Call_Me_Tim


    Honestly, with this gak, I think buggies didn’t need a nerf.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 18:38:29


    Post by: Chaos Jim


     dreadblade wrote:
    These new T'au knight killers make me optimistic that the new Imperial and Chaos Knights codexes will have some interesting buffs...


    It also makes me worry about what they’re going to do for said Knight codexes. If Tau are getting all these buffs and people are losing they’re minds over them, then I don’t even want to think about how well other factions getting similar or higher level buffs would go.
    Knights definitely need a revamp for 9th edition, but if GW continues with the level of buffs for every other faction like they did for the Tau, then I think knights are at high risk of becoming their old edition OP versions again.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 19:11:52


    Post by: Leo_the_Rat


    Knights will get "Force Field" it will give you a save vs all weapons even those that ignore invulnerable saves.

    This is GW's answer to everything just add more rules.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 19:33:06


    Post by: Racerguy180


    Leo_the_Rat wrote:
    Knights will get "Force Field" it will give you a save vs all weapons even those that ignore invulnerable saves.

    This is GW's answer to everything just add more rules.


    Water is wet


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 20:00:47


    Post by: Voss


     Some_Call_Me_Tim wrote:
    Honestly, with this gak, I think buggies didn’t need a nerf.


    Eh. This sort of thing bothers me less than buggies or railguns.
    There's no real practical way to spam this- you're dumping points and CP and 1 of 3 (or 2) detachments, and it won't get certain subfaction benefits (unless they've changed that for tau).

    Its a bit of an excessive weapon profile, but at least it isn't violating any game rules. Just maybe one-shotting vehicles or elite terminator-level infantry MSUs.
    Though the amount of innate re-rolls they're handing out to Tau is profoundly stupid.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 20:05:17


    Post by: Manchild 1984


    I think everyone will get quantum shielding


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 20:32:42


    Post by: Blndmage


    *cries in Necron*


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 21:18:50


    Post by: p5freak


     Unit1126PLL wrote:
    Yeah. Even with 2 shots, not impressed compared to HH railgun. It doesn't ignore invulns.


    Is this the new standard now ? Not impressive, unless it ignores invulns ?


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 21:32:26


    Post by: Void__Dragon


     pumaman1 wrote:
    All of this "woe is me" panic about a 1 phase of play faction, as if we aren't going to see huge changes like the sisters of battle got for bloody rose in the "seasons of warhammer" nonsense, applied to most the other older factions


    You misunderstand the problem friend. It is because Tau are a mono-phase army that makes their previews worrying. Instead of fixing the fundamental flaws in Tau's binary playstyle, GW just appears to want to buff their shooting. Either their shooting won't be enough and they'll continue to be bad, or they'll be overbearing like Admech planes before the nerf. The game has outgrown armies that only play the game in the shooting phase. Unfortunately most Tau fans in my experience are delusional about how poorly-designed their army really is.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 21:46:02


    Post by: Unit1126PLL


     p5freak wrote:
     Unit1126PLL wrote:
    Yeah. Even with 2 shots, not impressed compared to HH railgun. It doesn't ignore invulns.


    Is this the new standard now ? Not impressive, unless it ignores invulns ?


    Oh, no, I am very impressed.

    Just not compared to the HH railgun (like I said in my post).


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 22:52:48


    Post by: Platuan4th


    I have a feeling that had the reveals been reversed, there would have been more discussion on this. As is, GW kind of blew their load early by leading with the Railgun.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/13 22:54:57


    Post by: Manchild 1984


     Blndmage wrote:
    *cries in Necron*

    Necrons don't cry, they melt


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 00:06:48


    Post by: H.B.M.C.


    Meanwhile, in the Tomb World...

    It really does suck to be the first Codex of a new edition.




    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 00:20:22


    Post by: Leo_the_Rat


    At least Necrons got a codex this edition. There are lots of players waiting for their (soon to be hybrid) 9th/10th editions codices.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 01:00:33


    Post by: evil_kiwi_60


     H.B.M.C. wrote:


    It really does suck to be the first Codex of a new edition.



    At least you’re not CSM still rocking the second codex of 8th? But it is funny that the faction with technology that makes a mockery of space-time is getting out done by make mass for fast.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 01:23:10


    Post by: Daedalus81


    Voss wrote:
    Dispersed shot is better against greater daemons. And DE transports and heavy infantry. And a lot of things, really.

    Once you factor in invulnerable saves and how S16 is meaningless against anything below T7, you're better off sitting back and blasting.


    You want to do dispersed the vast majority of the time, because then the odd CP reroll / miracle die / etc is weighed far less heavily on the end result.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 02:33:23


    Post by: H.B.M.C.


     evil_kiwi_60 wrote:
    At least you’re not CSM still rocking the second codex of 8th?
    I'm a Chaos player. And a Tyranid player. I know what it feels like.

    (In fact it's often quicker to list the armies I don't have - Sisters, Chaos Knights, DA/BA/BT/IF/IH/RG/Sallies/Wolves, Grey Knights and technically Dark Eldar, even though I have a bunch of minis for them, but they're for the 40k RPG, not for 40k)

     evil_kiwi_60 wrote:
    But it is funny that the faction with technology that makes a mockery of space-time is getting out done by make mass for fast.
    The Railgun has a very silly set of rules. I could almost live with it if it weren't for the "ignore invuls" thing, both because conceptually that makes zero sense why that weapon would have that ability, and because it just starts a new war of escalation in exceptions to exceptions to exceptions.



    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 04:35:12


    Post by: Voss


     Daedalus81 wrote:
    Voss wrote:
    Dispersed shot is better against greater daemons. And DE transports and heavy infantry. And a lot of things, really.

    Once you factor in invulnerable saves and how S16 is meaningless against anything below T7, you're better off sitting back and blasting.


    You want to do dispersed the vast majority of the time, because then the odd CP reroll / miracle die / etc is weighed far less heavily on the end result.


    Basically, yeah. There are cases where you want the focused blast (like a T8, 3+ vehicle with no invulnerable save), but losing half the damage for one failure (or enemy success) on the string of 3 or more die rolls is a bad strategy.
    Or strats. It sucks a little when someone pulls a 'gotcha' on a Damage 4 shot, but its grueling when they play a trap card for a 12 damage shot.

    Its one of those weapon options where you can just straight-up do the mathhammer and come up with an obvious answer, and then minimize risk accordingly.


    Automatically Appended Next Post:
    Leo_the_Rat wrote:
    At least Necrons got a codex this edition. There are lots of players waiting for their (soon to be hybrid) 9th/10th editions codices.


    Meh. Better to wait. The necron miniature line got a lot of benefit out of being first, but the codex was screwed over way too fast by the paradigm shifts. d3+3 or 3d3 snuck onto a total of 4 weapons (one of which is on the new version of the screwed-over LoW Monolith and another is on a character), and now that kind of damage improvement gets handed out like candy (and is now officially Old News, with a new plateau to beat), and necron defensive abilities got pretty trashed (old quantum shielding would have been godly against the new weapons).

    And honestly, it was obvious it was going to suffer by being first, and it ended up with far too many new units that have the same role as old units (or other new units, which is just... baffling).
    Then there's the word salad for command protocols and res protocols (which gaks multi-wound units)... I just don't know what they were thinking.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 06:03:24


    Post by: Spoletta


    So, a little bit of data on the railgun

    Confirmed at BS4+, degrading to 6+.
    Leaks are a bit unclear on point costs, but it seems quite low. As far as I understood, 145 base, 175 with weapons.

    Markerlights can give it +1 to hit, but they became quite a lot harder to apply (can't move and shoot them).

    This would make them decent without being broken, but there is indeed one big big issue.

    Tau sept can reroll one wound roll per unit, and THAT makes Railguns very very good. Luckily, it doesn't seem to be the sept of choice.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 06:34:32


    Post by: kodos


    Voss wrote:
    I just don't know what they were thinking.

    they gave a clear answer to that during the 10th Edition video interview: "we have a new crazy idea every 2 minutes, and now we have the possibilities to put all those ideas into the game"

    I guess no one thought they are serious with that statement, but it looks like that their game design is exactly that, a random collection of crazy ideas


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 09:29:05


    Post by: a_typical_hero


     Void__Dragon wrote:
    You misunderstand the problem friend. It is because Tau are a mono-phase army that makes their previews worrying. Instead of fixing the fundamental flaws in Tau's binary playstyle, GW just appears to want to buff their shooting. Either their shooting won't be enough and they'll continue to be bad, or they'll be overbearing like Admech planes before the nerf. The game has outgrown armies that only play the game in the shooting phase. Unfortunately most Tau fans in my experience are delusional about how poorly-designed their army really is.
    Nah man, you just don't get it. I have it on good authority that anything but increasing the shooting output of Tau is only a small step away from having a single codex for all factions.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 12:18:49


    Post by: Unit1126PLL


    Spoletta wrote:
    So, a little bit of data on the railgun

    Confirmed at BS4+, degrading to 6+.
    Leaks are a bit unclear on point costs, but it seems quite low. As far as I understood, 145 base, 175 with weapons.

    Markerlights can give it +1 to hit, but they became quite a lot harder to apply (can't move and shoot them).

    This would make them decent without being broken, but there is indeed one big big issue.

    Tau sept can reroll one wound roll per unit, and THAT makes Railguns very very good. Luckily, it doesn't seem to be the sept of choice.


    Less than a Fire Prism or Tank Commander, with access to both +1 to hit and reliable RR to wound (from the very same Sept as Longstrike).

    Neat.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 14:11:36


    Post by: Gene St. Ealer


     Unit1126PLL wrote:
    Spoletta wrote:
    So, a little bit of data on the railgun

    Confirmed at BS4+, degrading to 6+.
    Leaks are a bit unclear on point costs, but it seems quite low. As far as I understood, 145 base, 175 with weapons.

    Markerlights can give it +1 to hit, but they became quite a lot harder to apply (can't move and shoot them).

    This would make them decent without being broken, but there is indeed one big big issue.

    Tau sept can reroll one wound roll per unit, and THAT makes Railguns very very good. Luckily, it doesn't seem to be the sept of choice.


    Less than a Fire Prism or Tank Commander, with access to both +1 to hit and reliable RR to wound (from the very same Sept as Longstrike).

    Neat.


    HH doesn't have any optional wargear, right? So really it's a minimum of 175? That's more than a Fire Prism and the same as a TC, though obviously the TC goes up when you pay for the weapons you want. We don't know how the +1 to hit works exactly so I'm not sure we can really comment on it.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 14:17:03


    Post by: beast_gts


     Gene St. Ealer wrote:
    HH doesn't have any optional wargear, right?
    Seeker Missiles & Drone swaps IIRC


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 14:53:32


    Post by: Aenar


    According to the leaks the HH is 145 naked, 155 with either 2x SMS or 2x Burst cannons (no idea how much with drones instead). Ion cannon costs 10 more, each one use only Seeker missile costs 5.
    It's likely it will be 155 with the most common loadout (165 if you want seekers).

    T'au Sept offers 1 free reroll per unit (either to hit or to wound) and Longstrike (no idea how much he costs), who can let a single HH nearby count has having one markerlight (+1 to hit now).
    Farsight Enclaves also give 1 free wound reroll per unit, apparently.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 15:06:06


    Post by: Spoletta


    In those 2 septs they can put good work, but I think we will not see them.

    Most will go for Borkan with a Stormsurge. Much safer investment.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 16:31:22


    Post by: Unit1126PLL


     Aenar wrote:
    According to the leaks the HH is 145 naked, 155 with either 2x SMS or 2x Burst cannons (no idea how much with drones instead). Ion cannon costs 10 more, each one use only Seeker missile costs 5.
    It's likely it will be 155 with the most common loadout (165 if you want seekers).

    T'au Sept offers 1 free reroll per unit (either to hit or to wound) and Longstrike (no idea how much he costs), who can let a single HH nearby count has having one markerlight (+1 to hit now).
    Farsight Enclaves also give 1 free wound reroll per unit, apparently.


    Nice.

    Glad to see all the folks who said the sky was falling were completely wrong, and there's definitely no access to +1 to-hit, no easy access to wound rerolls, and certainly not on a platform under 160 points.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 16:44:57


    Post by: deviantduck


     Unit1126PLL wrote:
     Aenar wrote:
    According to the leaks the HH is 145 naked, 155 with either 2x SMS or 2x Burst cannons (no idea how much with drones instead). Ion cannon costs 10 more, each one use only Seeker missile costs 5.
    It's likely it will be 155 with the most common loadout (165 if you want seekers).

    T'au Sept offers 1 free reroll per unit (either to hit or to wound) and Longstrike (no idea how much he costs), who can let a single HH nearby count has having one markerlight (+1 to hit now).
    Farsight Enclaves also give 1 free wound reroll per unit, apparently.


    Nice.

    Glad to see all the folks who said the sky was falling were completely wrong, and there's definitely no access to +1 to-hit, no easy access to wound rerolls, and certainly not on a platform under 160 points.
    Wait a minute... all three of those things are true!. Oh you rascal.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 17:35:19


    Post by: Irbis


     Aenar wrote:
    According to the leaks the HH is 145 naked, 155 with either 2x SMS or 2x Burst cannons (no idea how much with drones instead). Ion cannon costs 10 more, each one use only Seeker missile costs 5.
    It's likely it will be 155 with the most common loadout (165 if you want seekers).

    Gladiator Lancer is 180 pts minimum. Because worse tank with its SCARY s10 ap-3 Dd3+3 gun warranted 20% points premium over HH.

    Balance, what's that?


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 17:44:11


    Post by: Daedalus81


     Unit1126PLL wrote:
     Aenar wrote:
    According to the leaks the HH is 145 naked, 155 with either 2x SMS or 2x Burst cannons (no idea how much with drones instead). Ion cannon costs 10 more, each one use only Seeker missile costs 5.
    It's likely it will be 155 with the most common loadout (165 if you want seekers).

    T'au Sept offers 1 free reroll per unit (either to hit or to wound) and Longstrike (no idea how much he costs), who can let a single HH nearby count has having one markerlight (+1 to hit now).
    Farsight Enclaves also give 1 free wound reroll per unit, apparently.


    Nice.

    Glad to see all the folks who said the sky was falling were completely wrong, and there's definitely no access to +1 to-hit, no easy access to wound rerolls, and certainly not on a platform under 160 points.


    I guess we're ignoring that it's BS4 and that +1 to Hit is for one model and is at the cost of another model entirely. The Markerlight system is still a bit of a mystery and whether or not T'au Sept is the go to is up in the air.

    Assuming Longstrike plus a HH both equating to BS3 from abilities and rerolling all hits and wounds the end result is this:

    6.9% dead ( up from 4% )
    4.3% unharmed
    33.4% 12 to 14 wounds
    55.4% 1 to 4 wounds

    The HH does not have the option to not take drones. As it sounds like prices are not dropping much then Longstrike will still be about 200. This means 350+ points to ace a 450 point model 7% of the time.

    Spoiler:




    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 18:08:21


    Post by: Irbis


     Daedalus81 wrote:
    The HH does not have the option to not take drones. As it sounds like prices are not dropping much then Longstrike will still be about 200. This means 350+ points to ace a 450 point model 7% of the time.

    You mean 64% of the time, because Knight at 1-4 wounds has BS 5-6 and M6, so can be safely ignored and/or plinked to 0 by remaining 100+ points. An INSANELY high probability for way too cheap. And you mean 450-700 pts model depending on type/upgrades, making the above ratio far worse. And most likely wrong on Longstrike not getting cut/upgrades too. Soo...




    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 18:12:04


    Post by: Ordana


     Irbis wrote:
     Daedalus81 wrote:
    The HH does not have the option to not take drones. As it sounds like prices are not dropping much then Longstrike will still be about 200. This means 350+ points to ace a 450 point model 7% of the time.

    You mean 64% of the time, because Knight at 1-4 wounds has BS 5-6 and M6, so can be safely ignored and/or plinked to 0 by remaining 100+ points. An INSANELY high probability for way too cheap. And you mean 450-700 pts model depending on type/upgrades, making the above ratio far worse. And most likely wrong on Longstrike not getting cut/upgrades too. Soo...
    a 1 wound knight will function at full power because there is a strat specifically for that.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 18:44:47


    Post by: Unit1126PLL


    IT (and the other) T:

    "Don't worry, it will probably be over 200 pts and super fragile for cost"
    "don't worry, it's a lot riding on very few dice rolls without access to many buffs"

    Later, after it has access to rerolls to wound, rerolls to hit, +1 to hit, and only costs 160 points (and yes, it can not take drones. The Burst Cannons / SMS replace the drones on the model, so unless it's getting a new kit...):

    "It's not that bad anyways"

    Mind factoring in a CP reroll on one of those damage rolls, daedalus? Just curious about those last few wounds. After all, it's the only thing on the hammerhead that doesn't reroll, so far, anyways...

     Ordana wrote:
    a 1 wound knight will function at full power because there is a strat specifically for that.

    A one-wound knight dies to 12 Firewarriors at 36" on average, and very nearly dies to 6 of them at 36" if they have +1 to-hit from a Markerlight and a single hit or wound reroll from their sept.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 19:02:26


    Post by: Tyran


    Oh Knights are definitely fethed. But with the loss of FTGG, loss of savior protocols and the nerfs to Riptides (no 3++, Nova reactor can stop working), a list that runs all HH and SS is going to be eaten alive by the fast melee armies of 9th edition.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 19:14:41


    Post by: Tyel


    I'm probably in camp "this is busted".

    A further skew towards "if you shoot first, you have a high chance just to roll up a win".

    Still not totally convinced its a step up on existing stuff - and it may not work competitively because of the fact that if you go second it may all be too slow.

    But for casual games this is just stupid.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 19:20:20


    Post by: Eldarsif


    My guess is that the Knight books that will come later down the line will have something that reduces damage, gives them a ward save, or there is a limit on how many wounds a single weapon can deal to them.

    Ultimately the problem is that 8th level codices are just on a very different power level than 9th so comparing those two is a moot point at this point. Knights are woefully outdated at this point which I feel every time I field one. What I am more interested in seeing is how the Tau codex deals with 9th edition codexes and how much auto-delete I can expect on Mortarion.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 19:33:58


    Post by: Daedalus81


     Unit1126PLL wrote:
    IT (and the other) T:

    "Don't worry, it will probably be over 200 pts and super fragile for cost"
    "don't worry, it's a lot riding on very few dice rolls without access to many buffs"

    Later, after it has access to rerolls to wound, rerolls to hit, +1 to hit, and only costs 160 points (and yes, it can not take drones. The Burst Cannons / SMS replace the drones on the model, so unless it's getting a new kit...):

    "It's not that bad anyways"

    Mind factoring in a CP reroll on one of those damage rolls, daedalus? Just curious about those last few wounds. After all, it's the only thing on the hammerhead that doesn't reroll, so far, anyways...

     Ordana wrote:
    a 1 wound knight will function at full power because there is a strat specifically for that.

    A one-wound knight dies to 12 Firewarriors at 36" on average, and very nearly dies to 6 of them at 36" if they have +1 to-hit from a Markerlight and a single hit or wound reroll from their sept.


    This isn't what most people were saying and your deliberately misrepresenting arguments.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 19:35:32


    Post by: Unit1126PLL


     Daedalus81 wrote:
     Unit1126PLL wrote:
    IT (and the other) T:

    "Don't worry, it will probably be over 200 pts and super fragile for cost"
    "don't worry, it's a lot riding on very few dice rolls without access to many buffs"

    Later, after it has access to rerolls to wound, rerolls to hit, +1 to hit, and only costs 160 points (and yes, it can not take drones. The Burst Cannons / SMS replace the drones on the model, so unless it's getting a new kit...):

    "It's not that bad anyways"

    Mind factoring in a CP reroll on one of those damage rolls, daedalus? Just curious about those last few wounds. After all, it's the only thing on the hammerhead that doesn't reroll, so far, anyways...

     Ordana wrote:
    a 1 wound knight will function at full power because there is a strat specifically for that.

    A one-wound knight dies to 12 Firewarriors at 36" on average, and very nearly dies to 6 of them at 36" if they have +1 to-hit from a Markerlight and a single hit or wound reroll from their sept.


    This isn't what most people were saying and your deliberately misrepresenting arguments.


    Feel free to elaborate where you consider my summaries wrong.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 19:40:39


    Post by: Daedalus81


     Irbis wrote:
     Daedalus81 wrote:
    The HH does not have the option to not take drones. As it sounds like prices are not dropping much then Longstrike will still be about 200. This means 350+ points to ace a 450 point model 7% of the time.

    You mean 64% of the time, because Knight at 1-4 wounds has BS 5-6 and M6, so can be safely ignored and/or plinked to 0 by remaining 100+ points. An INSANELY high probability for way too cheap. And you mean 450-700 pts model depending on type/upgrades, making the above ratio far worse. And most likely wrong on Longstrike not getting cut/upgrades too. Soo...




    "Upgrades" like being a totally different knight of knight with 28 to 30 wounds with a main gun that can clear through a HH on it's own? Kay.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 19:41:03


    Post by: Voss


     Unit1126PLL wrote:


    Feel free to elaborate where you consider my summaries wrong.
    Well, you did leave out a lot of the blather about percentages and charts (that weren't actually helpful); and of course 'terrain is magic and will stop them from being a threat while leaving them in charge range of the entire table but too far away to benefit from mont'ka.'


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 19:46:44


    Post by: Daedalus81


     Unit1126PLL wrote:
    Feel free to elaborate where you consider my summaries wrong.


    LOL, considering I'm like one of the only dissenting opinion since this revelation I'll ask you to direct quote me where I said those things.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 19:48:26


    Post by: Dudeface


     Unit1126PLL wrote:
     Daedalus81 wrote:
     Unit1126PLL wrote:
    IT (and the other) T:

    "Don't worry, it will probably be over 200 pts and super fragile for cost"
    "don't worry, it's a lot riding on very few dice rolls without access to many buffs"

    Later, after it has access to rerolls to wound, rerolls to hit, +1 to hit, and only costs 160 points (and yes, it can not take drones. The Burst Cannons / SMS replace the drones on the model, so unless it's getting a new kit...):

    "It's not that bad anyways"

    Mind factoring in a CP reroll on one of those damage rolls, daedalus? Just curious about those last few wounds. After all, it's the only thing on the hammerhead that doesn't reroll, so far, anyways...

     Ordana wrote:
    a 1 wound knight will function at full power because there is a strat specifically for that.

    A one-wound knight dies to 12 Firewarriors at 36" on average, and very nearly dies to 6 of them at 36" if they have +1 to-hit from a Markerlight and a single hit or wound reroll from their sept.


    This isn't what most people were saying and your deliberately misrepresenting arguments.


    Feel free to elaborate where you consider my summaries wrong.


    I'll bite. Its still frail, it's still a swingy unit, it did drop to bs4 base so that +1 to hit is a net break even. You're relying on 1 specific Sept for the reroll which, frankly, doesn't seem the best one imo.

    I still don't expect to see people taking 4 of them 24/7.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 19:57:09


    Post by: Some_Call_Me_Tim


    Don’t think it’s game breaking, but definitely very very strong. Same spot as squigbuggies. Let’s just hope GW hates Tau as much as they hate orks.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 20:02:41


    Post by: Unit1126PLL


    Daedalus81 wrote:
     Unit1126PLL wrote:
    Feel free to elaborate where you consider my summaries wrong.


    LOL, considering I'm like one of the only dissenting opinion since this revelation I'll ask you to direct quote me where I said those things.

    You aren't one of the only dissenting opinions on this, so constraining it to "only things I said" is being silly. You KNOW people were saying what I typed. That's why you've offered this artificial constraint. You didn't even chime into the original thread until what, like a third of the way through? 5 pages in? something like that.

    Dudeface wrote:
     Unit1126PLL wrote:
     Daedalus81 wrote:
     Unit1126PLL wrote:
    IT (and the other) T:

    "Don't worry, it will probably be over 200 pts and super fragile for cost"
    "don't worry, it's a lot riding on very few dice rolls without access to many buffs"

    Later, after it has access to rerolls to wound, rerolls to hit, +1 to hit, and only costs 160 points (and yes, it can not take drones. The Burst Cannons / SMS replace the drones on the model, so unless it's getting a new kit...):

    "It's not that bad anyways"

    Mind factoring in a CP reroll on one of those damage rolls, daedalus? Just curious about those last few wounds. After all, it's the only thing on the hammerhead that doesn't reroll, so far, anyways...

     Ordana wrote:
    a 1 wound knight will function at full power because there is a strat specifically for that.

    A one-wound knight dies to 12 Firewarriors at 36" on average, and very nearly dies to 6 of them at 36" if they have +1 to-hit from a Markerlight and a single hit or wound reroll from their sept.


    This isn't what most people were saying and your deliberately misrepresenting arguments.


    Feel free to elaborate where you consider my summaries wrong.


    I'll bite. Its still frail, it's still a swingy unit, it did drop to bs4 base so that +1 to hit is a net break even. You're relying on 1 specific Sept for the reroll which, frankly, doesn't seem the best one imo.

    I still don't expect to see people taking 4 of them 24/7.


    Let me rehash what I said before in the earlier thread:
    1) Glasshammer 40k is not a fun game.

    2) 3+ with reroll, 3/2+ with reroll, ignores all saves isn't swingy.

    3) "Net break even" if you just ignore the free hit reroll I guess.

    4) Congrats on finding a new argument! Oh wait, it's not new, Longstrike has been T'au sept forever so we were always constraining ourselves to the T'au sept (if the argument included Longstrike). The fact that the T'au sept happens to be "you get a free wound reroll per unit!" on a unit with a single shot gun that kills 4 models/does 10-12 wounds with no saves of any kind allowed is just icing on the cake.

    Also, Farsight Enclaves includes a wound rr as well according to this rumor.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 20:03:03


    Post by: Daedalus81


    Voss wrote:
     Unit1126PLL wrote:


    Feel free to elaborate where you consider my summaries wrong.
    Well, you did leave out a lot of the blather about percentages and charts (that weren't actually helpful); and of course 'terrain is magic and will stop them from being a threat while leaving them in charge range of the entire table but too far away to benefit from mont'ka.'


    Right. Right. Hey guys. Does anyone else remember when Eradicators were the most broken unit ever? Pepperidge Farm remembers.





    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 20:05:12


    Post by: Unit1126PLL


     Daedalus81 wrote:
    Voss wrote:
     Unit1126PLL wrote:


    Feel free to elaborate where you consider my summaries wrong.
    Well, you did leave out a lot of the blather about percentages and charts (that weren't actually helpful); and of course 'terrain is magic and will stop them from being a threat while leaving them in charge range of the entire table but too far away to benefit from mont'ka.'


    Right. Right. Hey guys. Does anyone else remember when Eradicators were the most broken unit ever? Pepperidge Farm remembers.


    A real peppridge farm would remember them showing up between the Indomitus box and dex release in 3x3s (for the people that could get them) and then getting nerfed when the dex released a couple months later.

    If I recall correctly, they were nerfed AGAIN at some point, but I am not peppridge farm and forget if a second round of nerfs hit or not.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 20:13:10


    Post by: Voss


     Daedalus81 wrote:
    Voss wrote:
     Unit1126PLL wrote:


    Feel free to elaborate where you consider my summaries wrong.
    Well, you did leave out a lot of the blather about percentages and charts (that weren't actually helpful); and of course 'terrain is magic and will stop them from being a threat while leaving them in charge range of the entire table but too far away to benefit from mont'ka.'


    Right. Right. Hey guys. Does anyone else remember when Eradicators were the most broken unit ever? Pepperidge Farm remembers.


    Huh. Now I'm not sure if you know if that means anything.
    But I guess have a belated welcome to the 40k arms race, however. You've apparently missed DG resetting the initial paradigm with DR, then DE and AdMech escalating things far beyond that initial plateau.
    Welcome to the latest plateau, since you've exchanged the plot for a random unrelated meme.

    But in case you're still here for the Tau, they get rerolls to hit and rerolls to wound for free, and can sprinkle in some random bonuses to hit however they like (including also for free). Just like eradi... oh, no wait.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 20:15:49


    Post by: Daedalus81


     Unit1126PLL wrote:


    A real peppridge farm would remember them showing up between the Indomitus box and dex release in 3x3s (for the people that could get them) and then getting nerfed when the dex released a couple months later.

    If I recall correctly, they were nerfed AGAIN at some point, but I am not peppridge farm and forget if a second round of nerfs hit or not.


    5 points. That's it. And people still thought that wasn't enough.


    Automatically Appended Next Post:
    Voss wrote:


    But in case you're still here for the Tau, they get rerolls to hit and rerolls to wound for free, and can sprinkle in some random bonuses to hit however they like (including also for free)


    Sprinkle in a single +1 via a likely 200 point HQ. Maybe he'll drop in price with him not handing out an aura.

    It also won't stack with markerlights.

    HH are within 10 points of current cost and lost a BS. The only thing that makes things better for HH from the previous picture is reroll wounds, which makes montka absolutely useless to them.

    There's no more FTGG and no free overwatch. Only certain markerlight units can move before using them. Savior protocols is strat only now.

    There's alot more to the Tau picture.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 22:16:41


    Post by: Dysartes


    ...did HH have a built-in re-roll to hit before, Daed?


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 22:17:27


    Post by: Dudeface


     Daedalus81 wrote:
     Unit1126PLL wrote:


    A real peppridge farm would remember them showing up between the Indomitus box and dex release in 3x3s (for the people that could get them) and then getting nerfed when the dex released a couple months later.

    If I recall correctly, they were nerfed AGAIN at some point, but I am not peppridge farm and forget if a second round of nerfs hit or not.


    5 points. That's it. And people still thought that wasn't enough.


    Automatically Appended Next Post:
    Voss wrote:


    But in case you're still here for the Tau, they get rerolls to hit and rerolls to wound for free, and can sprinkle in some random bonuses to hit however they like (including also for free)


    Sprinkle in a single +1 via a likely 200 point HQ. Maybe he'll drop in price with him not handing out an aura.

    It also won't stack with markerlights.

    HH are within 10 points of current cost and lost a BS. The only thing that makes things better for HH from the previous picture is reroll wounds, which makes montka absolutely useless to them.

    There's no more FTGG and no free overwatch. Only certain markerlight units can move before using them. Savior protocols is strat only now.

    There's alot more to the Tau picture.


    You're doing it wrong, that one tank ignores invulns and has rerolls with high damage you immediately need to assume you've lost any game you could play, just in case they bait and switch into a 4 Hammerhead list which might kill 4 single wound infantry a turn if you don't have any big juicy tanks.

    Woe me, its almost like they've introduced a rock-paper-scissors mechanic. The game isn't in a healthy state but the hammerhead is a symptom not a cause, but it's not going to ruin the game for most people.

    Maybe I'm biased, I'll likely never see one, but then I don't play with douches that would rock up with 4 and laugh at how amazingly op their tank it while it kills 2 intercessors a turn.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 22:25:12


    Post by: Rihgu


    Except that each Hammerhead kills 4 1W infantry a turn before factoring in secondary weapons/use of stratagems. Due to doing damage + mortal wounds.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 22:49:22


    Post by: Daedalus81


     Dysartes wrote:
    ...did HH have a built-in re-roll to hit before, Daed?


    I mean in the analysis before we discovered the points.


    Automatically Appended Next Post:
    Rihgu wrote:
    Except that each Hammerhead kills 4 1W infantry a turn before factoring in secondary weapons/use of stratagems. Due to doing damage + mortal wounds.


    Which is 20 to 40 points.

    FYI to all the Broadside Railgun :

    Heavy 2 S9, AP -4, d3+3 damage, 1 auto MW on successful wound


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 22:53:53


    Post by: Blndmage


    *closes Tomb World for business*


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 23:08:08


    Post by: Rihgu


     Daedalus81 wrote:

    Which is 20 to 40 points.


    *cries in 96 points of Warp Talons*


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 23:11:45


    Post by: Voss


     Daedalus81 wrote:

    Voss wrote:


    But in case you're still here for the Tau, they get rerolls to hit and rerolls to wound for free, and can sprinkle in some random bonuses to hit however they like (including also for free)


    Sprinkle in a single +1 via a likely 200 point HQ. Maybe he'll drop in price with him not handing out an aura.

    It also won't stack with markerlights.

    I was referring to markerlights. The 'and also for free' was referencing the Farsight bonus. I wasn't including any sort of HQ, let alone a 200 point one.

    HH are within 10 points of current cost and lost a BS. The only thing that makes things better for HH from the previous picture is reroll wounds, which makes montka absolutely useless to them.

    And... you know, all their guns are better. Including even burst cannons, but whatever. And also reroll hits, so 'the only thing' is a lie.


    There's alot more to the Tau picture.

    Yes. There is.
    Which is why your constant litanty of 'oh, the changes to HH's main gun don't matter and stormsurge guns don't matter and this & that change don't matter and whatever else doesn't matter' is a weird stance for you to take.

    Now, the loss of FTGG and mass overwatch may screw the army over and make it more of a one note disaster, but that doesn't make the 'exceptions to exceptions' railgun OK, nor the overall continued escalation of the 'who has the even more bigger gun' race.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/14 23:43:03


    Post by: Daedalus81


    Markerlights get removed after every unit that shoots the target. So, without Longstrike you need 6 to apply two stacks to support two HH. That's a 6 man PF team which comes to about the same cost as LS and a HH.

    Again, when I said "the only thing" I was referencing what changed from earlier in the discussions.

    I didn't say the changes don't matter. What I did say was:

    It sucks to have to deal with this issue without a quick patch for sure [ for Knights ].

    It is still a problem for Knights who have to move out of the all titanic mindset and need more tools, but that's sort of outside whether or not the HH will be a problem overall.

    No one is saying Knights are safe. They need tools to deal with this as do Greater Daemons. What people are saying is that the Rail Gun is by no means an absurd design for a weapon. There's other considerations that can make the HH stupid, but it's really impossible to discern where it will land and I'm betting other parts of the codex will be the bigger problem.


    Bork'an makes Fusion Blasters 22", which means they come in at half range from DS. FB also picked up the Melta rule. Sky Rays never run out of ammo and can strat into ignoring LOS and +1 to wound on top of other stuff making them incredibly versatile and competing for slots in the Heavy section. Broadsides are INFANTRY and have a whole host of potential benefits. GKs can't be targeted at all outside 18". Kroot are pretty damn amazing.

    What will dictate what gets used is what wins games. A tank in the back field isn't generally what will win you games unless you only face Knights.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/15 08:23:52


    Post by: Dysartes


    Grey Knights not being able to be targeted from over 18" away would be an interesting way of bringing The Aegis back, but I'm not sure why such an upgrade would be in the Tau book...


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/15 08:51:12


    Post by: Spoletta


    There is nothing free in the new markerlights.

    They are more powerful, but also much harder to apply.

    Just so we are on the same page:

    - Using the markerlights is an action which starts at the start of your movement phase and ends at the start of your shooting phase.

    What this means, is that you can markerlight only the things that were visible at the start of the turn. You can't move to get line of sight and then apply a markerlight.
    Actually, with the exception of drone and vehicles, you can't move at all or the markerlight fails.

    - After the action is completed, you need to roll a 3+ for each ML to be applied. This isn't an hit roll, so you can't reroll it in any way. This has the perk though of allowing infantry to shoot both ML and normal weapons in the same turn.

    - The pathfinders are the only ones who can move and THEN shoot the ML, but here's the catch... they now come only in units of 10! So you are sacrificing a lot to apply those ML.

    Now, unfortunately the knights on some maps can't be hidden, so the MLs will get at them.
    This means that Tau are back to their old role of being big game hunters.
    This also means though, that a setup based on long range firing and ML support, will fail against most factions of the game. Said in other words, it is a skew.
    Most Tau lists will be high mobility and short ranged.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/15 09:50:42


    Post by: Aenar


    Spoletta wrote:
    - Using the markerlights is an action which starts at the start of your movement phase and ends at the start of your shooting phase.

    What this means, is that you can markerlight only the things that were visible at the start of the turn. You can't move to get line of sight and then apply a markerlight.
    Actually, with the exception of drone and vehicles, you can't move at all or the markerlight fails.

    No, the rule states that you draw range and LOS at the start of the shooting phase, when the action ends.
    Fire Markerlights (Action): One or more Markerlight units from your army can start to perform this action at the start of your movement phase. Aircraft Markerlight units can perform this action. The action is completed at the start of your next shooting phase.
    If this action is successfully completed, for each model in that unit that is equipped with one or more markerlights, for each markerlight that model is equipped with, select one enemy unit within 36" of that model that would be an eligible target for that model if its unit had been selected to shoot, and roll one D6: on a 3+, that enemy unit gains one Markerlight token.
    While a VEHICLE or DRONE unit is performing the Fire Markerlights action, that unit can move without that action failing. If it does, until the end of the turn, models in that unit without the VEHICLE or DRONE keyword that are equipped with any markerlights are treated as not being equipped with any markerlights for the purpose of the Fire Markerlights action.

    (emphasis mine)

    Only Fire Warrior shas'uis, Firesight Marksmen, Cadre Fireblades and Stealth shas'uis with ML will be the units that can't move and shoot ML natively (they can all do it in Montka during the first three turns anyway), because Drones, Vehicles and Pathfinders (ie all the remaining units with ML) all can move freely without the action failing.
    And since Montka looks like the best choice 9 times out of 10, every single ML unit will be able to move and then apply them.

    Well, at least if these leaks are accurate of course.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/15 10:49:16


    Post by: Spoletta


    Oh, I didn't see that part.

    Does Montka allow you to move without failing actions?


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/15 10:57:47


    Post by: Aenar


    Spoletta wrote:
    Oh, I didn't see that part.

    Does Montka allow you to move without failing actions?

    It says "Each time this unit makes a Normal Move or Advances in your Movement phase, until the end of your Shooting phase it counts as having Remained Stationary".
    Since it's valid until the end of the shooting phase, it's valid during the time the ML action occurs.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/15 11:05:01


    Post by: Spoletta


    If i remember correctly, in those situations you count as having performed a move and as having remained stationary. Since performing a move breaks actions, I think that ML won't work even with Montka. That's a topic for YMDC though.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/15 11:32:04


    Post by: EightFoldPath


    I think Aenar is right with regards to what can't move and shoot MLs, but I think he is wrong with regards to Montka countering that.

    What I'm wondering about is ML drones in Strike Teams, can they move and still ML? I'm looking forward to reading the whole codex!


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/15 11:41:32


    Post by: sanguine40k


    EightFoldPath wrote:
    I think Aenar is right with regards to what can't move and shoot MLs, but I think he is wrong with regards to Montka countering that.

    What I'm wondering about is ML drones in Strike Teams, can they move and still ML? I'm looking forward to reading the whole codex!


    Wording suggests that non-ML models don't count for the action, so won't cause it to fail.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/15 11:56:57


    Post by: Ordana


    I would assume the whole point of all these things being actions during the movement phase instead of being simply "if you didn't move then X" is precisely to avoid Mont'ka nullifying all of it.

    So no I don't think you will be allowed to do actions and move during your movement phase with Mont'ka. And even if the community decides you can GW will faq it to specifically block it.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/15 12:47:27


    Post by: Jidmah


    Spoletta wrote:
    If i remember correctly, in those situations you count as having performed a move and as having remained stationary. Since performing a move breaks actions, I think that ML won't work even with Montka. That's a topic for YMDC though.


    That would be correct - the act of making a normal move or advancing causes the action to fail, even if you count as being stationary.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/15 15:05:18


    Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


     Daedalus81 wrote:
    Voss wrote:
     Unit1126PLL wrote:


    Feel free to elaborate where you consider my summaries wrong.
    Well, you did leave out a lot of the blather about percentages and charts (that weren't actually helpful); and of course 'terrain is magic and will stop them from being a threat while leaving them in charge range of the entire table but too far away to benefit from mont'ka.'


    Right. Right. Hey guys. Does anyone else remember when Eradicators were the most broken unit ever? Pepperidge Farm remembers.







    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/15 21:39:50


    Post by: SemperMortis


    chaos0xomega wrote:
     catbarf wrote:
     Backspacehacker wrote:
    100 units and 5 tanks does not sound very small scale to me.
    And thats the issue, its not small to me, to you it might be, to me its not.


    Look at the art in your codex and tell me if the battles look like they involve a total of 100 guys and 5 tanks on each side.

    In the real world, that's not even a full infantry company, reinforced by an armored platoon, and their engagement would be a minor skirmish, not even a 'battle'. It's not a big enough unit to have organic air support or artillery. A fight at this scale really shouldn't involve either- an Imperial Guard company commander is not going to have aircraft, superheavy tanks, or division-level artillery directly under his command. That's just not how the Guard is structured.

    To justify the force composition we see in 40K you basically have to assume you're playing a small part of a much larger battle, but with major strategic assets allocated to this particular skirmish for some reason. You're not playing the Battle of Stalingrad, you're playing Pavlov's House, except there's a King Tiger there.

    Epic is a better representation of the scale of 40K lore, and operates at a game scale where things like superheavies, aircraft, and long-range artillery fit more organically.


    He said 100 *units*, not 100 *guys*. 100 *units* is not a company, depending on what you mean by "units" you're probably talking somewhere between a battalion and a brigade in size, which could (and likely would) have access to at least some, if not all of the organic assets you're clamoring on about depending on the organization of the guard unit in question.

    Also, your perception of what constitutes a battle is flawed. By definition, a battle is "an occurrence of combat in warfare between opposing military units of any number or size that is well defined in duration, area, and force commitment." Two companies clashing can certainly constitute a battle, arguably this is more or less typical for what might constitute a battle in the modern war especially in lower intensity conflict. Given how wide unit frontages have become and the extremely large areas of operation that very small units are expected to cover in the modern day on what are termed "empty battlefields" for a fairly good reason, its not outside of the realm of reality for two company sized formations to enter into a discrete combat action that would be termed a battle.

    A King Tiger does not constitute a "strategic asset" by any sense of the definition of the term.


    This is kind of a semantic argument. Yeah, any time there is an engagement you can technically call it a battle but in reality we don't. Otherwise we would have things like "The 407th battle of Sangin Valley" when in reality, unless there was a major operation involving at the least a Battalion backed with MEF level artillery/armor/air power, we just called it a skirmish or a firefight. I mean hell, I remember when 1st Battalion 6th Marines did a battalion sized attack against the Taliban who dominated the Sofla area around the Kajaki Dam, I think it had an operational name, something like Eastern Storm, but it didn't even get a battle name or anything glorious. And that unit had something like 1,000 Marines/sailors if you include the MEF assets assigned.

    So with that in mind, yeah, these "battles" we fight on tabletop would be at best skirmishes, and the # of vehicles involved would be odd in most circumstances.

     Daedalus81 wrote:


    Right. Right. Hey guys. Does anyone else remember when Eradicators were the most broken unit ever? Pepperidge Farm remembers.


    You mean the Eradicators which heavily featured in every single Marine list for the first few months after their codex was released until they received a 12% increase in price and Marine players decided to switch over to the MM attack bikes which were ALMOST as damaging but significantly more durable/faster. You are right, I do remember them being oppressive in their ability to delete units at will.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/15 22:52:48


    Post by: a_typical_hero


    SemperMortis wrote:
    You mean the Eradicators which heavily featured in every single Marine list for the first few months after their codex was released until they received a 12% increase in price and Marine players decided to switch over to the MM attack bikes which were ALMOST as damaging but significantly more durable/faster. You are right, I do remember them being oppressive in their ability to delete units at will.
    And by "heavy" we talk about 3-6 models (aka 1 full squad) usually? IIRC there never was a top1 list going "heavy" with 18 Eradicators.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/15 22:53:48


    Post by: Unit1126PLL


    I think up until the codex came out they were max 3 squad size, and I remember plenty of 9 eradicator lists (3x3).


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/16 08:20:18


    Post by: Spoletta


    They were always 6, but you don't take them in squads of 6 since they have to target the same unit, and 6 erads are really an overkill on anything smaller than a knight.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/16 08:54:51


    Post by: Blackie


    You take them in squad of 6 to avoid burning many HS slots, then you just combat squad them and they become two independent units of three models.

    6 models were the bare minimum at the beginning of 9th as tons of players got two SM halves from the starter set. Then 9-12 were also an option, even though a bit less common due to models' availability.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/16 10:48:34


    Post by: Jarms48


    Dudeface wrote:

    You're doing it wrong, that one tank ignores invulns and has rerolls with high damage you immediately need to assume you've lost any game you could play, just in case they bait and switch into a 4 Hammerhead list which might kill 4 single wound infantry a turn if you don't have any big juicy tanks.


    It has secondary weapons as well. It can pump out 8 pulse carbine or 12 burst cannon shots or whatever the smart missile system is these days.

    I mean, if you're fighting marines. You put the railgun against dreadnoughts, attack bikes, characters, basically any single target with a lot of wounds.



    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/16 17:31:27


    Post by: Daedalus81


    SemperMortis wrote:
    You mean the Eradicators which heavily featured in every single Marine list for the first few months after their codex was released until they received a 12% increase in price and Marine players decided to switch over to the MM attack bikes which were ALMOST as damaging but significantly more durable/faster. You are right, I do remember them being oppressive in their ability to delete units at will.


    No.

    Eradicators featured heavily in some lists. Namely hamfisted Salamanders lists. At the same time Drop pod devs, attack bikes, and BGV featured quite a lot as well.

    An Eradicator went to 45 points. An Attack Bike was 55. Attack Bikes were popular for far longer than Eradicators ever were even though they were less powerful on paper. Why? Because there's a lot more than "this unit does a lot of damage!" to 40K.

    We'll see lists with four HH and then people will probably learn that there are better more nuanced lists that are more effective.


    Railgun vs Knights @ 2022/01/16 18:58:20


    Post by: SemperMortis


    a_typical_hero wrote:
    SemperMortis wrote:
    You mean the Eradicators which heavily featured in every single Marine list for the first few months after their codex was released until they received a 12% increase in price and Marine players decided to switch over to the MM attack bikes which were ALMOST as damaging but significantly more durable/faster. You are right, I do remember them being oppressive in their ability to delete units at will.
    And by "heavy" we talk about 3-6 models (aka 1 full squad) usually? IIRC there never was a top1 list going "heavy" with 18 Eradicators.


    yes, they featured by SM standards HEAVILY. Or are we only going to call "heavily" maxing out, if that is the case then almost no unit plays heavily into any space Marine list.

     Daedalus81 wrote:

    No.
    Eradicators featured heavily in some lists. Namely hamfisted Salamanders lists. At the same time Drop pod devs, attack bikes, and BGV featured quite a lot as well.
    An Eradicator went to 45 points. An Attack Bike was 55. Attack Bikes were popular for far longer than Eradicators ever were even though they were less powerful on paper. Why? Because there's a lot more than "this unit does a lot of damage!" to 40K.

    We'll see lists with four HH and then people will probably learn that there are better more nuanced lists that are more effective.


    So to summarize, you admit they were heavily into some lists until people realized that MM attack bikes were better because they had more durability/speed with slightly less firepower. Likewise, a lot of people ran Dev MM because the overall cost might be slightly higher, but they were a 175pt auto-delete anything on the table unit in a drop pod, something that Eradicators couldn't have because apparently its too hard to retrofit a drop pod to handle an extra 4 inches of Primaris Marine

    The point was that yes they were heavily relied upon in a lot of lists, in competitive lists they made frequent appearances until people realized that with the 9th mission set it would be better to go for speed teamed with that ridiculous firepower put out by the newly buffed MM.

    BTW, SM Players, I was promised my Tankbustas were going to get a similar treatment to MMs.....still waiting for that