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.

Just make the heraldry more complex to represent the Grail Knights.

IHEARTLARGEBLASTTEMPLATES wrote:The whole idea of bretonnia is to destroy your opponent with a solid "glorious" charge in the front. Not wait for the peasants to catch up.... then skulk around and hit them while they are distracted.

The reason i played bretonnia was for the nights not the peasants. and i find myself relying more and more on them as the days go by... equaling no fun for me. Rather just play a unique empire army with a sweet color scheme.

I think knights still have a place. There is nothing glorious about charging a massive unit of skaven slaves. But charge in against some monstrous infantry/small elite units and that charge becomes rather nice and still feels fluffy . Like others have said before me, choose your fights. The glory can still be won where it needs to be.

Exactly, I think I'd still want to play a small elite knight army, you'd just need:

Max units of Knights of the Realm, take two units of 15 at least.

Level 4 Mage w/Lore of Life/Light

Trebuchets: As many as you can to think down enemy ranks

I'd probably also bring a deathstar of Grail Knights. WS 5 Str 6 In 5 with two attacks + horses is still going to be extremely deadly. Take the Banner of Defense for the 4+ Ward save and they are almost immune to small arms fire.

To answer the question posted earlier, about making GK and KotR look different while using the same models....

First, invest in the GK HQ. That alone will make a huge difference, even if you use unmodified KotR models for the rest of the unit.

Second involves making head choices for your whole army. A common one I've heard is using unhelmed heads for KE, plain helms for KotR, and crested helms for GK.

Third, incorporate Grails into the rest of the converted knight's heraldry whenever possible. Use actual gold and silver paint, rather than the traditional yellow and white.

Finally - if your sculpting skills are up to it - make GS cloaks for your converted GK's. Add grails to crests and shields and cloaks and such wherever you can.

eNvY wrote:I have a Bretonnian modelling question:

The Knights of the Realm and the Grail Knights models look strikingly similar. I'd go so far to say as the Knights of the Realm look better, and are significantly cheaper. So I'm thinking I'll just try and convert some Knights of the Realm to make them stand out and look like important knights. One option I was considering was using Chaos Knight horses to make them look mean and intimidating. Can anybody else think of any ideas?

Its what I'm doing

Just slap some BT stuff on them and some extra heraldry, worse comes to worse just paint them differently

I get more and more surprised at the number of people complaining about Brettonian's, I think their still a solid army, but now they require some new strategies. I do understand that stubborn troops can be extremely annoying for you, but if you use a proper army you can obliterate those threats.

I suggest fielding large numbers of peasants (5 wide 8 deep or so) not as an attacking arm, but as a defensive line defending your Trebuchets, the knights are the glorious defenders of the realm, so you use them as such.

Have the Knights move up the flanks with MSU tactics of 6 to 8 knights of the realm, Pegasus knights are incredible for anti-empire work. Take a Prophetess and a Damsel or two for magic defense, and offense, the lore of Beasts is terrifying when used by this army, (3 characters attack for up to 15 attacks that hit on 3's with strength 7 or 8.)

Simply put we complain because the entire Bretonnian playbook has been thrown in the bin. Most people started Bretonians to play offensively with knights, now we're expected to somehow use the games worst and somewhat over priced infantry in that role. What exactly a Men at Arms block is suppost to do in the face of other races heavy infantry is anyones guess. (Die more than likely)

Now to be fair, Longbowmen have come out somewhat ahead of the game especialy with their stakes giving them light cover, for 6 points they are a bit of a bargin. But to take advantage of that turns an aggressive, offensive army into a defensive and somewhat passive army. Its not as much fun and thats my main complaint.

Challenger

Why do people think you should just be able to smash through the front of infantry and break them? You're freaking M8...hit a flank or something. "But they can just reform and follow me!" you say; not if you have one unit in the front and one in the flank, then they're always exposed.

As to not using peasants, hey if you want to play with half an army book, don't whine about lack of flexibility. Big block giving you problems? Nothing a trebuchet or two can't solve. Regen-ing monsters running around? Nothing 60 or so flaming bow shots wont put some hurt on. As Citadel said above, use a "proper army".

Guys, it's a new edition, learn to adjust.

Marshal Torrick wrote:Why do people think you should just be able to smash through the front of infantry and break them? You're freaking M8...hit a flank or something. "But they can just reform and follow me!" you say; not if you have one unit in the front and one in the flank, then they're always exposed.

As to not using peasants, hey if you want to play with half an army book, don't whine about lack of flexibility. Big block giving you problems? Nothing a trebuchet or two can't solve. Regen-ing monsters running around? Nothing 60 or so flaming bow shots wont put some hurt on. As Citadel said above, use a "proper army".

Guys, it's a new edition, learn to adjust.

Seconded.....the peasants are there as support..the knights are still the main fighting unit...

For the empire it's the other way around...

Two full ranks of troops in the flank negate rank bonus, for Brets thats just six knights. Not too bad really.

Sanguinis wrote:Yes I completely and utterly agree that was my whole reason for starting a Bretonnian army I really think that Bretonnians had some awesome looking units and some really awesome tactics charging the enemy and swatting them out of the way with your lances and forcing them to run it always reminded me of the scene from Lord of the Rings where Gandolf comes in at the last minute with the Riders of Rohan and breaks the Mordor army that is assualting Helms Deep. That scene was actually one of the things that made me start fantasy and that is why I liked the Bretonnians.

You know... the charge Gandalf led at Helm's Deep was into the flank of the uruk-hai, who were tied up fighting crappy peasants. Just saying.

sebster wrote:

Sanguinis wrote:Yes I completely and utterly agree that was my whole reason for starting a Bretonnian army I really think that Bretonnians had some awesome looking units and some really awesome tactics charging the enemy and swatting them out of the way with your lances and forcing them to run it always reminded me of the scene from Lord of the Rings where Gandolf comes in at the last minute with the Riders of Rohan and breaks the Mordor army that is assualting Helms Deep. That scene was actually one of the things that made me start fantasy and that is why I liked the Bretonnians.

You know... the charge Gandalf led at Helm's Deep was into the flank of the uruk-hai, who were tied up fighting crappy peasants. Just saying.

And some "glade guard" while "Louen Leoncoeur, Karl Franz (or possibly Valten) and some Grail Knights" sallied forth

we can carry this analogy on for quite some time

Marshal Torrick wrote:Why do people think you should just be able to smash through the front of infantry and break them? You're freaking M8...hit a flank or something. "But they can just reform and follow me!" you say; not if you have one unit in the front and one in the flank, then they're always exposed.

Three points

1) Historicaly speaking Heavy Cav did just that. If you didn't have pikes, a strong defensive possition, alot of long/crossbows or better a mix of the three, infantry was generaly screwed.
2) Flanking effectively requires two units, which as knights are expensive means the enemy has two or more units, which means I'm not flanking him unless he's an idiot
3) Flanking doesn't work that way. It makes no odds if I'm in the flank or front as their still stubbon until the last rank goes.

Marshal Torrick wrote:
As to not using peasants, hey if you want to play with half an army book, don't whine about lack of flexibility. Big block giving you problems? Nothing a trebuchet or two can't solve. Regen-ing monsters running around? Nothing 60 or so flaming bow shots wont put some hurt on. As Citadel said above, use a "proper army".

Guys, it's a new edition, learn to adjust.

As a Bretonnian player who does just that, I wonder if you've tried it. Because frankly its ineffective at best. Trebs are very nasty, but still only hit 1/3rd of the time, its a longshot to base an entire army arround. Likewise 60 Longbowmen will on average kill 0 Chaos Knights, 1 Empire Knight, 2 Chaos Warriors, 5 Dwarfs, 10 Spear Men a turn. Thats not going to weaken enemy units enough before they are in charge range.

A more effective solution is go overboard on archers, somewhere arround the 100 mark and play defensively, think 100 Years War and your about there. Its not as much fun to use though, very passive and inflexable.

Face facts, the one and only strength of the Bretonnian Army was its Cavalry. Without their Cavalry they have little going for them.

Challenger

Orlanth wrote:Two full ranks of troops in the flank negate rank bonus, for Brets thats just six knights. Not too bad really.

Afraid not, you need 10 models in two ranks to cause Disruption and negate Rank Bonus.
While the Lance Formation helps with your own Rank Bonus, it doesn't get around needing full 5 wide ranks to cause Disruption like Montrous Infantry can.

Challenger wrote:Three points

1) Historicaly speaking Heavy Cav did just that. If you didn't have pikes, a strong defensive possition, alot of long/crossbows or better a mix of the three, infantry was generaly screwed.

That's a massive generalisation, and very dependant on exactly which period in time you are 'historically' speaking of.

2) Flanking effectively requires two units, which as knights are expensive means the enemy has two or more units, which means I'm not flanking him unless he's an idiot
3) Flanking doesn't work that way. It makes no odds if I'm in the flank or front as their still stubbon until the last rank goes.

This assumes the frontal charge and the flanking charge are both made by knights. Which is a really odd assumption. You use a block of infantry in the front, while knights hit the flank.

Thanatos_elNyx wrote:

Orlanth wrote:Two full ranks of troops in the flank negate rank bonus, for Brets thats just six knights. Not too bad really.

Afraid not, you need 10 models in two ranks to cause Disruption and negate Rank Bonus.
While the Lance Formation helps with your own Rank Bonus, it doesn't get around needing full 5 wide ranks to cause Disruption like Montrous Infantry can.

this is RAW at its worst unfortunately....and GW did a piss poor job clarifying this in the faq...

freddieyu1 wrote:

Thanatos_elNyx wrote:

Orlanth wrote:Two full ranks of troops in the flank negate rank bonus, for Brets thats just six knights. Not too bad really.

Afraid not, you need 10 models in two ranks to cause Disruption and negate Rank Bonus.
While the Lance Formation helps with your own Rank Bonus, it doesn't get around needing full 5 wide ranks to cause Disruption like Montrous Infantry can.

this is RAW at its worst unfortunately....and GW did a piss poor job clarifying this in the faq...

2nd that. and had a game with Bretonnians yesterday went really well. our knights still do dominate im happy to say but i found my self using men-at-arms as bait and just staying near them behind them so they can use my leadership. Then they will stay put i ran a block of 30. Then next turn My horses charge. then that unit it dead. Then my horses go through there battle line alone. I found i really only need the peasants for the opening charge. Then after that my knight start tearing apart! so over all still fun to play, just different, o and my trebuchet missed 3 times but 4th turn killed 17 clanrats with one shot the war lord was in that unit and they weren't coming back! also ran 15 Bowmen, they did okay just dropped a few models here and there.

IHEARTLARGEBLASTTEMPLATES wrote:

freddieyu1 wrote:

Thanatos_elNyx wrote:

Orlanth wrote:Two full ranks of troops in the flank negate rank bonus, for Brets thats just six knights. Not too bad really.

Afraid not, you need 10 models in two ranks to cause Disruption and negate Rank Bonus.
While the Lance Formation helps with your own Rank Bonus, it doesn't get around needing full 5 wide ranks to cause Disruption like Montrous Infantry can.

this is RAW at its worst unfortunately....and GW did a piss poor job clarifying this in the faq...

2nd that. and had a game with Bretonnians yesterday went really well. our knights still do dominate im happy to say but i found my self using men-at-arms as bait and just staying near them behind them so they can use my leadership. Then they will stay put i ran a block of 30. Then next turn My horses charge. then that unit it dead. Then my horses go through there battle line alone. I found i really only need the peasants for the opening charge. Then after that my knight start tearing apart! so over all still fun to play, just different, o and my trebuchet missed 3 times but 4th turn killed 17 clanrats with one shot the war lord was in that unit and they weren't coming back! also ran 15 Bowmen, they did okay just dropped a few models here and there.

See? A bit more skill, and isn't it realistic using the peasants as bait, the way it was meant to be? Besides, what could be more heroic than the Lord rescuing the poor commoner's from the nasty monsters?

haha i admit i still had alot of fun with my knight of bretonnia and had to think a bit more, thats okay. changed my status no longer selling bretonnia

sebster wrote:

Challenger wrote:Three points

1) Historicaly speaking Heavy Cav did just that. If you didn't have pikes, a strong defensive possition, alot of long/crossbows or better a mix of the three, infantry was generaly screwed.

That's a massive generalisation, and very dependant on exactly which period in time you are 'historically' speaking of.

More or less anytime throughout the Medieval Period, early right through to late. One of the reasons the Scots shocked the English was the idea of mobile infantry shiltrums that could fend off cavalry unaided. Similary the English Longbowmen only defeated massed French Cavalry when they were in defensive possitions. When caught out of them (Patay) or forced out (Formigny) they were ridden down in short order. They are a fair number of battles where infantry defeated cavalry, but they are remembered because they were upsets. Battles where the knights rode over their enemies in one charge are normaly forgotten.

From a game mechanics POV I actualy prefer that knights will struggle breaking through from the front. My complaint is they can't do so from the flank unaided.

sebster wrote:
This assumes the frontal charge and the flanking charge are both made by knights. Which is a really odd assumption. You use a block of infantry in the front, while knights hit the flank.

Not realy, Men at Arms are damn near useless at the best of times and not cheap (running at 150points for arround 25 of them). YMMV as I primarily play against the likes of Dark Elves, Ogres, Orcs etc, but usualy putting a Men at Arms unit in the front of an actual combat unit is a good way to get them routed from the field. Its actualy easier to pin units with a medium size unit of knights. Except the enemy will still be steadfast once flanked and we're still screwed.

Challenger


Automatically Appended Next Post:

IHEARTLARGEBLASTTEMPLATES wrote:
2nd that. and had a game with Bretonnians yesterday went really well. our knights still do dominate im happy to say but i found my self using men-at-arms as bait and just staying near them behind them so they can use my leadership. Then they will stay put i ran a block of 30. Then next turn My horses charge. then that unit it dead. Then my horses go through there battle line alone. I found i really only need the peasants for the opening charge. Then after that my knight start tearing apart! so over all still fun to play, just different, o and my trebuchet missed 3 times but 4th turn killed 17 clanrats with one shot the war lord was in that unit and they weren't coming back! also ran 15 Bowmen, they did okay just dropped a few models here and there.

Interesting, my concern would be how well that works against say Dark Elves rather than Scaven.

Challenger

It doesn't work against elves. If you make it through the whithering amount shooting from bolt throwers, archers and magic. You now have to deal with 20+ spears and initiative 5 with re-rolls. Any knight unit that does win the close combat is most likely neutered from heavy loses. And M@As are just a big old gift for elves, might as well put a bow on them.

freddieyu1 wrote:

Thanatos_elNyx wrote:

Orlanth wrote:Two full ranks of troops in the flank negate rank bonus, for Brets thats just six knights. Not too bad really.

Afraid not, you need 10 models in two ranks to cause Disruption and negate Rank Bonus.
While the Lance Formation helps with your own Rank Bonus, it doesn't get around needing full 5 wide ranks to cause Disruption like Montrous Infantry can.

this is RAW at its worst unfortunately....and GW did a piss poor job clarifying this in the faq...

True, its the way of things for the moment but who knows, when the Bretonni get a new book (whenever that may be) they may give the Lance formation that ability.

I think the problem with using blocks of M@A is that they're doing the job of empire state troops except they suck at it, lack detachments, guns and arty support

BAsically we've been forced into becoming a poor man's empire, withe decent characters and ward saves, rather than an actual separate army

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Bretonnians only need three knights to count as a rank in all respects? Right? So for rank bonus, negating rank bonus with a flank charge, and...negating (and gaining) steadfast. This seems like it would be hugely useful.

12 Bretonnian knights have 4 ranks! That's twice as many as most units of knights. If you attack a unit of 25 or less infantry with a lance, you should be able to kill enough enemy to have more ranks than them, and then they're not steadfast.

If there the enemy unit is massive, then just charge two lances into it. Two lances with character support should be more than enough to crush most infantry in one round, right? Take 13-14 knights of the realm, add a lord or a BSB, and, hey presto, instant victory!

Obviously, it's not going to be that easy, since that kind of unit is only good at one thing - the headlong attack. It can be skirmished, shot, etc. and be rendered ineffective. But it's at least as good at a headlong smash as a horde of orks (or whatever).

Also, Pegasus knights. These guys suck. And by suck, I mean I hate to play against them. They're good, trust me. As are most Bretonnian troops. The reputation that most armies have are just that - reputations, not actual fact. Unless you're playing in very limited or competative environments most army books are just fine, and have a perfectly good chance at beating anyone. This is coming from a guy who beat GT winners with 6th edition Dark Elves - an army book reviled by most people on the internet.

In summary: Lances are good. Bretonnians are fine. People are stupid. Except for me. You can trust me.

Saber wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Bretonnians only need three knights to count as a rank in all respects? Right? So for rank bonus, negating rank bonus with a flank charge, and...negating (and gaining) steadfast. This seems like it would be hugely useful.

While the concensus is thats how its suppost to work, RAW are quite clear it isn't. Frankly if this was fixed Bretonian players wouldn't be complaining. (Everyone else probably would though)

Also, Pegasus knights. These guys suck. And by suck, I mean I hate to play against them. They're good, trust me.

Own then, use them, still haven't figured out how they are worth 250pts in 8th Edition. In 7th I'd agree, a vital part of my army, now over costed and of limited utility. Losing the ability to pick on missile troops kinda killed this unit for me.

As are most Bretonnian troops. The reputation that most armies have are just that - reputations, not actual fact. Unless you're playing in very limited or competative environments most army books are just fine, and have a perfectly good chance at beating anyone. This is coming from a guy who beat GT winners with 6th edition Dark Elves - an army book reviled by most people on the internet.

In summary: Lances are good. Bretonnians are fine. People are stupid. Except for me. You can trust me.

Can't say I agree, combat experience suggests that Men at Arms are practicaly worthless and without the ability to break units on the charge Knights remain useful only because of a lack of heavy infantry to replace them. That leaves Longbowmen as the primary combat force of the army......thats not good.


Thinking about it through, anyone tested out Questing Knights, they always seemed a bit, rubbish in 6th and 7th, but their GW should make them effective in 8th.

Challenger

Why so much hate on the men-at-arms. I like those guys! hey they might die easy or kill little put them in a unit of 30 around a unit of knights gives them ld 8. They will stay long enough for your knights to get there flank charge off and the knights will do the dirty work. They will win the combat and you should good! Don't under estimate the peasants!

I think its down to who I play. ld8 isn't that useful when you just lost combat by 4-6 against a unit of High/Dark Elves. They tend to fold quickly against most other races as well.

Plus IMO they are not cheap. Asside from costing 150-180points for a block, they require a 80point charecter or 120+ unit to stay within 6-12'' to remain ld8.

Challenger

Challenger wrote:I think its down to who I play. ld8 isn't that useful when you just lost combat by 4-6 against a unit of High/Dark Elves. They tend to fold quickly against most other races as well.

Plus IMO they are not cheap. Asside from costing 150-180points for a block, they require a 80point charecter or 120+ unit to stay within 6-12'' to remain ld8.

Challenger

Against DE/HE you will test on an 8 since your unit should have more ranks, and are thus steadfast. If the MaArms are to tarpit the enemy, then the unit should have as much ranks as possible in order to pin the enemy in place before the knights hit home.

I think in any army, the brets are literally going to be spending 1/2 of their points on peasants. 40 some odd archers, and:

Men At Arms in units of 40. 5x8.

Plus the BSB will almost always have the peasant vow so he can turn that wall into a nigh unbreakable mass of humanity.

yeah ld8 steadfast good luck breaking that. then add a BSB pshh tough cookies then.