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

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
Titans might not be okay in regular games, but knights are smaller and weaker, so it might be all right. Eldar already have a knight.
I actually hope that they don't make them superheavies but regular walkers with great armour and HP. A bit like walking land raiders.

Eldar and Tau got their Apocalypse units (Wraithknight, Riptide) as a no-effort way to make them "competitive". Now those Apocalypse units rule the 40k battlefield. Even more Apocalypse units don't make it better.

They weren't Apocalypse units. The Riptide and Wraithknight did not exist before the codices got updated to include the units.

Not to put words in his mouth, but I think Kroot was more referring to the style of unit being more appropriate for Apoc (and, to be fair, anything of the physical size was an Apoc unit beforehand, rules be damned) rather than a literal port of unit from sub-system to mainstream.

 BrookM wrote:
This, that's why I want it to be a MC, it is so much more durable than a vehicle in this edition.

So? Flyers are good in this edition too, so should knights be flying monstrous creatures then? Vehicles should use vehicle rules and if that means that they have certain weaknesses, then that should be reflected in their point cost.

Besides, I don't think AV14, 4 or 5 HP vehicle, maybe with an invulnerable save, would be that easy to kill.

 Crimson wrote:

 BrookM wrote:
This, that's why I want it to be a MC, it is so much more durable than a vehicle in this edition.

So? Flyers are good in this edition too, so should knights be flying monstrous creatures then? Vehicles should use vehicle rules and if that means that they have certain weaknesses, then that should be reflected in their point cost.

Besides, I don't think AV14, 4 or 5 HP vehicle, maybe with an invulnerable save, would be that easy to kill.

Weird argument there, since I'm pretty sure he wasn't thinking about Flying Knights, but, those sound like some nice rules there - you just make that up on the fly?

Flying Knights? I'm sorry, I don't watch Japanese cartoons.

 Crimson wrote:

 BrookM wrote:
This, that's why I want it to be a MC, it is so much more durable than a vehicle in this edition.

So? Flyers are good in this edition too, so should knights be flying monstrous creatures then? Vehicles should use vehicle rules and if that means that they have certain weaknesses, then that should be reflected in their point cost.

Besides, I don't think AV14, 4 or 5 HP vehicle, maybe with an invulnerable save, would be that easy to kill.

sure it is, a pen with a melta, then a high roll, = 400? dead points

 Alpharius wrote:

Weird argument there, since I'm pretty sure he wasn't thinking about Flying Knights, but, those sound like some nice rules there - you just make that up on the fly?

No he wasn't, but he was talking about making them MCs (whether it made sense or not) because MCs are better. So by same logic they could be flyers (whether it made sense or not), as flyers are better. But this is my pet peeve, things that are obviously vehicles not being vehicles bugs me a lot.

In any case Walkers with 13 or better armour are not that bad, and I think it could work. If you need them to be really durable, you can give them similar damage table re-roll that Venerable Dreads get.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

First0f0ne wrote:

sure it is, a pen with a melta, then a high roll, = 400? dead points

Then it shouldn't cost 400 points. Meltaguns are good at killing vehicles, that's their purpose. Do we just remove all vehicles from the game because a lucky shot with a melta can instakill them?

No but an Iconic unit such as a knight should not be one shot when the precedent of a durable MC "suit" type unit has been established.

Not to mention the fact that MCs are so much better in 6th than walkers could even hope for.

First0f0ne wrote:
No but an Iconic unit such as a knight should not be one shot when the precedent of a durable MC "suit" type unit has been established.

Not to mention the fact that MCs are so much better in 6th than walkers could even hope for.

Land Raiders are an iconic unit too. Should they be changed to MCs as well?

 Crimson wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:

Weird argument there, since I'm pretty sure he wasn't thinking about Flying Knights, but, those sound like some nice rules there - you just make that up on the fly?

No he wasn't, but he was talking about making them MCs (whether it made sense or not) because MCs are better. So by same logic they could be flyers (whether it made sense or not), as flyers are better. But this is my pet peeve, things that are obviously vehicles not being vehicles bugs me a lot.

In any case Walkers with 13 or better armour are not that bad, and I think it could work. If you need them to be really durable, you can give them similar damage table re-roll that Venerable Dreads get.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

First0f0ne wrote:

sure it is, a pen with a melta, then a high roll, = 400? dead points

Then it shouldn't cost 400 points. Meltaguns are good at killing vehicles, that's their purpose. Do we just remove all vehicles from the game because a lucky shot with a melta can instakill them?

Much as I would like to agree with you (vehicles are vehicles and monstrous creatures are monstrous creatures!) you're fighting a very losing battle.

Your biggest error is attempting to apply any logic to the vehicle and MC rules in 40k. Before hull points, you might have had a case. Monstrous creatures took wounds and kept fighting until they died, while vehicles could shrug off hits indefinitely until discrete components were destroyed or something vital exploded. They were quite different, and they were different for a reason. Hull points were an arbitrary addition to the vehicle rules with no logic behind them. They exist simply to eliminate the frustration of glancing or stunning your enemy's tank all game and never killing it.

Now thanks to hull points, you have two different damage systems that are similar - you score your hits, you roll to wound/pen, and every successful roll deals one point of damage... except MCs are getting an armor save. And vehicles can still be crippled or exploded with one hit. Why don't tanks, which are covered in armor, also get an armor save? Why don't monstrous creatures, who also have vital components and weak points, have a damage table?

There's no real logic behind this at all, and one system is inherently much worse. So naturally when GW puts out new walkers, they make them Monstrous Creatures so they'll survive long enough to do something. The cat is already out of the bag - Riptides and Wraithknights are the new baseline, and if the Imperial Knight is a walker, it will be garbage compared to them, no questions asked. You're talking about AV13 walkers as though the armor matters - it's the equivalent of a toughness 9 creature with 3+ wounds, no armor save, AND the ability to cripple or kill it instantly every time you damage it. Once you include the effects of melta/armourbane and AP1 weapons, it's a complete joke. It's absolute garbage in comparison.

Now that the precedent has been set, as much as I would like to agree with you, I would rather that every walker in the game got Monstrous Creature rules. Until GW rewrites the core rules of the game, it's unavoidable now.

 Crimson wrote:

First0f0ne wrote:
No but an Iconic unit such as a knight should not be one shot when the precedent of a durable MC "suit" type unit has been established.

Not to mention the fact that MCs are so much better in 6th than walkers could even hope for.

Land Raiders are an iconic unit too. Should they be changed to MCs as well?

Please read the whole sentence and don't respond to my thought out of context.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:


Now that the precedent has been set, as much as I would like to agree with you, I would rather that every walker in the game got Monstrous Creature rules. Until GW rewrites the core rules of the game, it's unavoidable now.

I agreed with you here, How the current game is designed I would very much like a version of the MC rules for all walkers. dreads, helbrutes, even sentinals

 Crimson wrote:

First0f0ne wrote:
No but an Iconic unit such as a knight should not be one shot when the precedent of a durable MC "suit" type unit has been established.

Not to mention the fact that MCs are so much better in 6th than walkers could even hope for.

Land Raiders are an iconic unit too. Should they be changed to MCs as well?

Hear, hear. If Knights are not walkers, then nothing should be walkers, and GW should accept that their current vehicle rules are a joke.

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:

Now that the precedent has been set, as much as I would like to agree with you, I would rather that every walker in the game got Monstrous Creature rules. Until GW rewrites the core rules of the game, it's unavoidable now.

GW will never do this. To do it would require dedication to game design in the abstract sense none of their current crop of slack-jawed yokels are capable of. Every single line of the entire rulebook and every army list needs to be rewritten by someone with half a brain and access to a professional proofreader/editor, and then, and only then, will the game be worth playing again.

It is obvious that MCs are better than Walkers, however, there are things that can mitigate those vulnerabilities somewhat, such as invulnerable saves and a rule such as 'venerable.' And yes, MCs are still better, but that's why we have point costs.

Simple justification for riptide and wraithknight as MCs:

Crisis suits and broadsides are not vehicles.

Wraithguard and Wraithlords are not vehicles.

 Crimson wrote:
Land Raiders are an iconic unit too. Should they be changed to MCs as well?

Yes, please.

The separate set of rules for vehicles is one of the things that I have always disliked about 40K. At least from 3rd ed onwards when they took out all of the extra detail that actually meant that there was some point to them having separate rules...

It gets progressively more nonsensical with each new big robot that GW adds into the game as an MC instead of a walker... Which, for me, makes it time to just can the vehicle rules entirely and roll them all into MCs.

 insaniak wrote:

The separate set of rules for vehicles is one of the things that I have always disliked about 40K. At least from 3rd ed onwards when they took out all of the extra detail that actually meant that there was some point to them having separate rules...

It gets progressively more nonsensical with each new big robot that GW adds into the game as an MC instead of a walker... Which, for me, makes it time to just can the vehicle rules entirely and roll them all into MCs.

Oh I agree, the completely different rules for vehicles and non-vehicles is the thing that bugs me most in the 40K ruleset. But as long as this separation exists, vehicles should use actual vehicle rules.

I agree that walkers should be walkers, and giant creatures be MCs, but GW wants to move product, and the ruleset requires more comprehensive changes than they're willing to do as of yet.

On the front of making walkers more viable, however, is invuln saves. I've been using the character Contemptor dreadnought from IA12 for a while now, and while only having three HPs limits its staying power enormously (there should be more HP variation, much like there is with wounds between units), the invuln save and venerable rules means it rarely dies to a lucky shot, and can stand similar attrition as MCs. In fact, by being AV13 it's immune, or nearly immune, to more weapons than MCs are. Can't volume of fire down something like that easily, especially with a 4++.

Better than AV12 and a reliable save of some variety actually makes walkers not suck; problem is, most walkers, including really iconic ones are AV12 with no save, and thus simply die. But that's another matter. If they build these theoretical Knight rules somewhat akin to Contemptors, they likely won't suck while being vehicles.

However, I'm not terribly excited by the idea of yet more giant walkers which probably don't belong in normal games. Honestly, when's the last time we had a decent tank kit, or maybe focus some resources on replacing godawful or missing models still in the range, rather than stuff few people are really asking for?

 MajorStoffer wrote:


However, I'm not terribly excited by the idea of yet more giant walkers which probably don't belong in normal games. Honestly, when's the last time we had a decent tank kit, or maybe focus some resources on replacing godawful or missing models still in the range, rather than stuff few people are really asking for?

I agree. However, as myself and others have noticed, GW is, and possibly increasingly, risk averse and conservative with its releases these days.

Why take the risk re-doing a model that people already own in another incarnation, therefore obligating yourself to really pull out all the stops and make it irresistible to those who don't need it, when you can make something up/trawl the archive, knock something up in Paint, glue a load of skulls on it, cobble together some half arsed rules and call it done?

I'm exaggerating, obviously, but hopefully you see what I'm saying.

Man I'm loving the whole knight titan idea...specially if its its own army....like an HQ, troops etc etc...walk on with 7 of those and go nuts lol...depending on the points cost and whatnot and if you could make every variant with one kit....

but why release the rules in a wd and still release plastic kits...if you miss out on the wd then there is no point in getting the kits right? Sounds kinda poopy...I bet they will toss them into the kits as well, so if you get the wd you have a nice book with the rules...but if not...here is something for ya in the kit too

If you miss out on the White Dwarf issue you can always get the rules in digital format, which is cute, but not super helpful for people do not possess a digital doohickey.

That's true too Brook....lets hope they put rules in the box then...

I hope this is true, I would love to see some knight models on 40k tables. It may or may not help sales of my Leviathans but from a strictly gamer hobbyist standpoint, I loves me some walkers

 NoseGoblin wrote:
I hope this is true, I would love to see some knight models on 40k tables. It may or may not help sales of my Leviathans but from a strictly gamer hobbyist standpoint, I loves me some walkers

We never would have guessed!

I'm with you on this one though - 40K Knights would be a sight to see!

This is a pretty exciting rumour to me. Despite never being an Imperial player at all I have fond memories of the Paladin Knights from the Titan Legions boxed set and seeing them on 40k battlefields would be pretty damn sweet. Shades of my younger days when squads of Stompas would take on squads of Knights in Epic. Hopefully it does indeed come to pass.

 NoseGoblin wrote:
I hope this is true, I would love to see some knight models on 40k tables. It may or may not help sales of my Leviathans but from a strictly gamer hobbyist standpoint, I loves me some walkers

I got 3 of your 15mm on the off chance we'd get Knight rules one day (or just make my own). Then the FW HH books make specific mention of them (as if they were eventually coming), and now this. That purchase I made of your lovely models is looking better and better every day.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 NoseGoblin wrote:
I hope this is true, I would love to see some knight models on 40k tables. It may or may not help sales of my Leviathans but from a strictly gamer hobbyist standpoint, I loves me some walkers

I got 3 of your 15mm on the off chance we'd get Knight rules one day (or just make my own). Then the FW HH books make specific mention of them (as if they were eventually coming), and now this. That purchase I made of your lovely models is looking better and better every day.

You did me one better there!

I 'only' got 2 - but I'll definitely be getting 1 of the 15mm Mortis versions, so I'll have a nice little Household of Three eventually!

GW's version is going to have to be an amazing work of art to beat DFG's though...

 insaniak wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 pretre wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
What better place to release rules for a new type of kit than in the weekly WD, that is only for sale for one week in GW stores, FLGSs and GW webshop with no chance for getting back issues after that. Well done!

Hence the reason it is unlikely and kind of a silly rumor. Either way, recent history says digital is much more likely, or even in box.

How long were Storm Raven, Ork plane and Battle Sister rules completely unavailable to anyone who didn't happen to score the relevant under-supplied White Dwarf?

Way too fething long!

Given how severely GWs relationship with digital products has changed over the past six months, I think it is foolish at best to look at the example of the Sisters of Battle, Dakkajet, or Stormtalon when wondering how any future White Dwarf rules releases are handled, you guys.

I think Defilers are the template for how Imperial Knights are represented. Defilers, even if not in name are effictively Chaos Knights. In epic, the most common knight has a cannon, a secondary weapon, a close combat weapon, and an energy shield of sorts. Maybe it's coincidental but that parallels a defilers cannon, reaper autocannons, crab claws, and it will not die.

Whichever division of GW is doing it I think its easy to presume this will not be a super heavy and will not have strength D weapons on the most basic form, since their nature insists they're part of a larger army of sorts with their own hierarchy with things more powerful than the basic paladin.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
That was the pic that convinced me to go into the Leviathan KS for some 15mm versions. They're the perfect size for Knights.

The resin "15mm" is 5.5" tall while the plastic "15mm" is a fair bit smaller at 4.6" tall.

http://dreamforge-games.blogspot.com/2012/08/history-in-making.html#!/2012/08/history-in-making.html

T

timd wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
That was the pic that convinced me to go into the Leviathan KS for some 15mm versions. They're the perfect size for Knights.

The resin "15mm" is 5.5" tall while the plastic "15mm" is a fair bit smaller at 4.6" tall.

http://dreamforge-games.blogspot.com/2012/08/history-in-making.html#!/2012/08/history-in-making.html

T

But even if you need to upgrade to the 28mm version of the DFG leviathans, you'll still get a great, functional "mini" at a much better price. Fully poseable and with custom weapon options.

I swear, if leviathans were to also transform into trucks, I'd be a happy man.