Player hypocracy and the new Knights

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.

**2x210**

Hypocracy?

Rule by those underneath?

Underneath?

Your a goddamned Mole Man aren't you!?

But if your saying it's hypocritical to like Knights but not the D-Slinging gunmen that Escalation brought, it's not.

CC D Weapons are not the same as the point and remove Ranged D Weapons Titans are tossing around.

You can out maneuver a Knight, you aren't running from a Reaver

**chromedog**

It's hypocrisy.

I have no idea what hypocracy is.

I neither like the nights nor the game that spawned them.

**Boniface**

i personally don't like the inclusion of the bigger models.
The riptide was borderline for me. It being the first one in 40k and introduced to a codex that doesn't have masses of options anyway. It is considered OP for a number of reasons (but not discussing this).

Then they started upping the ante on size and availability of said units. They're becoming more and more prolific in the game and therefore forcing the game upward (just by existing, the way flyers did).

This makes me personally frustrated because of the way 40k works on a unit level. You spend £30-40 on models to build a unit that can be wiped out in one turn because the big models have a lot more power.

Its a combination of factors that makes it a problem. If squads were, say, smaller and more numerous (like individuals) the big models couldn't destroy swathes of the army.
Fixes super heavies (to an extent) almost instantly (aside from costing).

If first blood didn't exist and KPs were done differently then people might be able to exploit this tactic.

I stand by my statement in other threads about the arms race thing.

On the issue of why one and not the other is ok, its harder to quantify. Escalation is out and part of the game so we've had to come to terms with that. Now a model has come out that isn't insanely OP comparative to the one that has been the issue and it's deemed acceptable because of the comparable differences.

Its one of those things that plagues the 40k forums. Tau came out and were stupidly powerful. Eldar followed with even better options. After this the perceived level of power is significantly higher and therefore other lesser things are let through without too much aggro.

An example could be grav tech for marines that is crazy powerful, but because it's not level to a riptide (and considered the counter to it) it's fine to go by without too much concern.

The lesser of two evils.

**Grim Dark**

chromedog wrote:
I have no idea what hypocracy is.

"Hypocracy" is politicians swearing to uphold the constitution upon entering office, and then doing what they damned well want after that. It replaced "democracy" in the 00s, which replaced "Republic of republics" in 90s.

The future is Grim.

**DarkWind**

So translation to everything I've read... It's change and we hate change... curse you change!!!

Any who I'm approaching this as a new challenge on the battlefield. Much like flyers it's just another thing to add more to the game, and it will change how you have to approach the table. I just hope if they do introduce super heavies they give all armies accuses to them off the bat.

**Asmodai Asmodean**

The trouble with Knights isn't while their alive, but when die; Now imagine 2-3 Knights going off all at once. They kill anything that kills them.

**Tiger9gamer**

I'm just not happy about what other players might do. I already got told if I bring a knight, another guy will bring a shadowsword and that melee D is just as good as large blast D.

I've been pretty happy about this new thing, until the internet exploded with hate.

**wowsmash**

Not to mention primary detachment is 3-6 I think someone said. 1 or 2 would be tough. I don't think my army would handle more than that at once.

**cuddle_nuts**

The only objective problem with the super-heavies, Escalation units, and Imperial Knights, is that not all armies are treated equally. And by equally, I don't mean that they have the same abilities, I mean that the point values are not equivalent. For instance, Khorne Lord of Skulls and the Stompa are way over priced for what they give, when compared to what other armies are getting, i.e. Eldar and IG).

These problems would not exist if GW made a valiant effort to make units that were comparable to one another, at least on points. But that's all part of GW's plan. They release armies or units that simply can't be beaten with what is currently out, let cheeseburgering players load up on them, and wait for everyone to get good and angry, and then release the solution to the problem. Normally, the solution becomes a problem in-and-of-itself, new deathstars are created, people QQ, and then GW releases some new again. Rinse and repeat.

If you don't have access to the good Escalation units, just ask your opponent if he/she intends to bring them. If yes, and you don't have anything to counter, then don't play. If the tournament you are going to doesn't allow super-heavies, and that is what you like to use, don't enter.

I honestly think that none of this will be resolved until the armies are equal, which will never happen because if it does, then GW won't have any momentum to sell anything.

**dracpanzer**

Escalation would be a lot easier to handle if they'd included Forgeworlds HH rule that a "lord of war" unit is limited in points to 25% of your total force. It's a lot easier to deal with a Revenant when you have 3600 points to kill it with. Since most tourneys cap out in the 1500-2000 range, the Revenant would be a total non issue. I like the Knight model, will be getting mine this weekend, and will struggle to get it onto my painting table soon so it can sit behind the back log of models, units, conversions, and purchased but untouched armies that haunt my sleep.

On the flip side, i think I have 28(ish?) of the Epic Knights, a whole lot of fun on the table top. Since I tend to look at my 40k games like the individual assaults and firefights in my Epic games, I love the idea of seeing super heavies and what not on the 40k table.

Would be interesting to see an Escalation tourney to allow players a 25% army total side board of units that either consisted of a Lord of War or the models you'd prefer to field if your opponent fielded a Lord of War. Players wouldn't be forced to play their sideboard, but would have the option to do so, Your opponent wants to sub in a Baneblade? You have the option to sub in 500 points of whatever to deal with it. Make sure the sideboard configuration still jives with the FOC (including one Lord of War, one Fortification from Stronghold) and you'd remove a lot of the issues as well as provide a real change up to the game.

**BaalSNAFU**

blaktoof wrote:
Part of the community reaction was the same as the initial reaction in the past to fliers being allowed in 6th edition.

There was probably more commentary regarding what the game would become when fliers were allowed before fliers were in the game then after.

The same is pretty true for escalation.

Prior to escalation being released many sites had many "well known" internet 40k peoples giving commentary about how these units would pretty much end 40k.

The main Difference IMO is that when fliers came out there were good fliers for the Imperial forces, which are the majority of players. So when the rules for them were release the overall amount of internet posts and topics regarding how fliers would ruin 40k disappeared.

When escalation came out, there were not good units for the imperial forces, despite the fact that escalation was not a set of optional rules, and just like death from the skies[other than the optional dog fighting rules] is part of the current core of 40k, many players still seemed to be very upset at this new part of the game. So much that many people in the "well known" 40k internet community has deemed it not part of the game, and decided it is optional, and do not allow it at tournaments or think it should not be part of casual play, etc.

I honestly believe this is simply because the imperials [space marines] did not get anywhere close to the best, or most iconic unit. The thunderhawk is good, but no one is writing internet posts or topics on it really. Most of the commentary is on the eldar titan, and then some on the stompa.

If the eldar instead had something like the cobra, or a flyer/bomber, and the warhound was released as the space marine Lord of War, IMO I think escalation would be better received then it was.

Despite the fact that escalation was released a little over 2 months ago, the internet banter and overall doomsday complaints about it existed for many months beforehand.

I feel GW knew the community would not accept escalation having 1 "bad unit" especially if it was non imperial [space marine] unit. Therefore they pushed out the knights, as "imperial knights" which although not from the escalation book require rules from it to be used. Supplying an iconic and "good" imperial model will allow for the customer base to calm down and become more accepting of escalation.

One of the possible reasons they are making 6.5/7th edition is so they can take this book, and put its contents into the physical main rulebook, to further force acceptance of superheavies being in the core of 40k, much like how fliers were put into the main rulebook. It is easier for a player to say that something is optional because its a different book, of course this is silly and the same as saying tau are optional because they are not in the core rulebook- but people can be silly . If its in the main rules, its a lot harder for people to say its optional, or try to exclude it.

Let us remember GW is a company that sells models, and they can sell more models if there are more models for people to choose from.

and yes it is hypocracy but many players do not make rules calls or have thoughts that they feel make the most sense RAW or to the background, they have thoughts and make rules and calls based on the armies they play.

Yes. Yes indeed. The reason why escalation wasn't welcomed with open arms was because Spehs Mahreens didn't get the best toys. It definitely, totally has nothing to do with the fething absurdity of titans removing $100+ worth of models per turn in 1500 point games.

As others have said, if you remove the titans and that CTan thingy escalation would be for the most part, acceptable. Better still with the 25% cap on warlords. I regularly play against a shadowsword and it usually kills a combat squad or two, then gets eaten alive be 50 points of meltabombs.

**MephistonLoD**

I typically only play 1500 point games... I'd honestly laugh if anyone brought 1 Knight to a game. They can be penned and exploded just like any other vehicle.

Imperial Knight meet Melta Sternguard.

**sfshilo**

I fully expect Knights to be banned from tournies....

**MephistonLoD**

Why? They're massively expensive walkers that can potentially die in one turn with a lucky pen. If they we're monstrous creatures then sure i'd be a little annoyed as well... But for 350/375 points they aren't that bad.

**nosferatu1001**

sfshilo wrote:
I fully expect Knights to be banned from tournies....

Opposite actually. Tau, Eldar, drop pod stern guard etc all laugh at them.

**Breng77**

MephistonLoD wrote:
I typically only play 1500 point games... I'd honestly laugh if anyone brought 1 Knight to a game. They can be penned and exploded just like any other vehicle.

Imperial Knight meet Melta Sternguard.

You do know that they cannot be penned and exploded right? Super heavies just suffer extra HP damage on an explodes result. Throw in the 4++ save against those sternguard....and maybe some bubble wrap and well maybe not so great.

**Noctiscoma**

Sleep debt wrote:
Wilytank wrote:
Then don't let it get into CC.

So why not say don't let the eldar titan get line of sight? See where this logic is going?

Except the Knight doesn't move 36 inches.

**gardeth**

They cost more than 3 naked russes but have less firepower, lower front armor, and fewer hullpoints.

Not to mention theres a chance that a unit of 5 wyches with haywire grenades can take one out on their own. 60 points vs over 370!

**Mavnas**

Look at it this way:

You have a rhino approaching the knight that has the big melts template. The knight has less than 50% chance to kill that thin from range each turn... Much less the dudes inside.

**Trickstick**

gardeth wrote:
They cost more than 3 naked russes...

A paladin costs 75pts less than 3 naked russes.

**gardeth**

Trickstick wrote:
gardeth wrote:
They cost more than 3 naked russes...

A paladin costs 75pts less than 3 naked russes.

Yeah, looks like I was off 25 points per Russ.... Stupid memory

**MephistonLoD**

Breng77 wrote:
MephistonLoD wrote:
I typically only play 1500 point games... I'd honestly laugh if anyone brought 1 Knight to a game. They can be penned and exploded just like any other vehicle.

Imperial Knight meet Melta Sternguard.

You do know that they cannot be penned and exploded right? Super heavies just suffer extra HP damage on an explodes result. Throw in the 4++ save against those sternguard....and maybe some bubble wrap and well maybe not so great.

Ha! No I did not! Well then...

**Siberiandreamer**

I remember in the old fantasy battle bestiary looking at the old Greater Deamon stats with awe and that they were like 800 points to take. I wonder if it's like that for kids now looking at these super heavies?

**Asmodai Asmodean**

Actually, Knights are at their most dangerous when they explode. Have you seen the superheavy explosion rules? Just brutal.

**krazynadechukr**

Sleep debt wrote:
.......but as soon as they can field or ally something it's not an issue any longer. I'm I off base with thinking this ?