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.

 LexOdin9 wrote:

Wulfey wrote:

 LexOdin9 wrote:

EDIT: something else to consider, the FAQ on pistols makes 10 strong MARS infiltrators bombs a very attractive way to get rid of some pesky assault units in your lines. Pistols can now shoot at enemies in combat with other units, so long as the enemies are the closest model. So that means that whatever is tying up my robots can be shot by infiltrators.

Wulfey posted this back a few pages ago. I can't find anything in the FAQ to support this.

Can someone quote the errata that supposedly allows you to do this?

Check the new pistols answer. I dont think the infiltrators themselves have to be in combat, but the closest enemy unit can be.

https://imgur.com/Yv4f9hV

https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/warhammer_40000_rulebook_en-1.pdf

The question originally had to do with a unit with pistols that are in close combat. I think that you are gonna have a tough time selling this one to your opponent or a TO in a tournament. I'd be careful with building lists with this intention in mind.

I think there's a decent case for it given the phrase in brackets at the end of the response. I agree though, it would be much clearer if the question related to pistol units generally rather those in combat

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The issue isn't killing Cultists. We have cost efficient means to do that.

The issue is that they're in your face, which means they actually need to be taken care of. Forgetting other Strategems that might increase their damage output, it's all about the potential tarpitting they can do.

Fall back and wipe them off the board, as usual? The big worry was stuff like Battlesuits and Assault Marines jumping past the screen and meleeing our Robots. That's mostly gone now. Chaos Lords seem to be the only thing left, and even they cannot overcome 20+ infantry; we'd be tar-pitting them.

I honestly don't see as much value for Scouts. They fulfill a function that has been superceded by new rules; they gave everyone respite from turn one deep strike. Now, since units come in turn two, your opponent has plenty of time to wipe your Scouts. So Big FAQ essentially gave everyone Scouts against everything but Infiltrate, and Blood Angels and Tau Battlesuits don't have an Infiltrate; their Stealth suits actually have a Scout deployment haha.

Alright, nvm the whole pistols shooting into combat thing. It is conditioned on the shooting unit having 1+ model within 1" of an enemy.

On a side note, I think people really underestimate the importance of having more bodies or larger bases, especially in screens. Having a blob of max-coherency Scouts in the middle of nowhere is fine. But your 25mm screen units should be base-to-base lines to prevent getting pinned in consolidation and not being able to fall back. Remember, for round bases, it only takes three models to pin a non-flying model in place. (A neat trick for Dragoons is actually to box in one or two models to gain invulnerability for a round.)

Suzuteo wrote:
On a side note, I think people really underestimate the importance of having more bodies or larger bases, especially in screens. Having a blob of max-coherency Scouts in the middle of nowhere is fine. But your 25mm screen units should be base-to-base lines to prevent getting pinned in consolidation and not being able to fall back. Remember, for round bases, it only takes three models to pin a non-flying model in place. (A neat trick for Dragoons is actually to box in one or two models to gain invulnerability for a round.)

Would you care to elaborate please ? I don't understand what you're saying with the boxing to gain invulnerability.

So, I was speculating. If we ever get a transport the likes of a Rhino, I believe Ryza is going to be really interesting. Let's say we can fit 10 models inside the transport, you could fit 10 Fulgurites that will reroll their 1s to Wound (and so increase the chance for mortal wounds), or 9 of them and a Dominus with the Prime Hermeticon trait and a CC relic could be great. Or why not use 3 of those transports close to each other and deliver 29 Fulgurites that reroll failed hits and 1s to Wound ?

Also, Kataphron Destroyers with plasma get even better, because their stratagem is pretty strong. You can protect them from getting shot at for a turn by hiding them in a bunker first. Keep a minimum of 2 Robots close by, pop Elimination Volley + Plasma Specialists on overcharge, and you have minimum 3d6 S8 AP-3 D3 shots, shot at 3+, rerolling 1s to Hit (because you keep a Dominus nearby ofc) and having +1 to Wound. You now wound everything under T8 on 2s with 3D each shot. Here, an anti-Custodes weapon. Or anti-everything really.

 Aaranis wrote:
Would you care to elaborate please ? I don't understand what you're saying with the boxing to gain invulnerability.

If you trap one model, the unit cannot fall back, so your Dragoons cannot be shot at.

When you finally get some free time to play 40k Suzuteo I would love to see a batrep or summary of your game.

Same goes for all of you. I enjoy reading them and occasionally pick up a thing or two

Suzuteo wrote:
On a side note, I think people really underestimate the importance of having more bodies or larger bases, especially in screens. Having a blob of max-coherency Scouts in the middle of nowhere is fine. But your 25mm screen units should be base-to-base lines to prevent getting pinned in consolidation and not being able to fall back. Remember, for round bases, it only takes three models to pin a non-flying model in place. (A neat trick for Dragoons is actually to box in one or two models to gain invulnerability for a round.)

you need a double line of b2b models to avoid being surrounded. A single file is just as easily surrounded by 3 models since round bases leave a small indentation.

 Ordana wrote:

Suzuteo wrote:
On a side note, I think people really underestimate the importance of having more bodies or larger bases, especially in screens. Having a blob of max-coherency Scouts in the middle of nowhere is fine. But your 25mm screen units should be base-to-base lines to prevent getting pinned in consolidation and not being able to fall back. Remember, for round bases, it only takes three models to pin a non-flying model in place. (A neat trick for Dragoons is actually to box in one or two models to gain invulnerability for a round.)

you need a double line of b2b models to avoid being surrounded. A single file is just as easily surrounded by 3 models since round bases leave a small indentation.

Yeah. Multiple lines are necessary. Don't just spread your guys out everywhere with max 2" coherency. Keep everything base to base (especially MSUs with small frontage) or less than 25mm apart (25mm being measured diagonally between two different lines, not horizontally within the same line). Gunlines have to be literal lines (in a "bowed" shape) or they will be pushed through via multiple pile-in and consolidation moves (combat sliding). Another thing you can do is make interlocking circles of models less than 25mm apart. Having a counter charger, such as Dragoons, can also be helpful. It was actually a mainstay during Index days to run nothing but Dragoons, as Skitarii were overpriced like crazy before.

Fact is, assault armies are one of our biggest threats. Learn their tricks and don't fall for them.

One more thing (man, this is like my fifth edit or something): You should not take casualties from the edges of your line; this will make it easier for them to slide past you. Take it from the center so it is harder to surround; they can pile into the next line, but that's fine. You need to be able to "retract" the line backward and inward.

HeavenLord wrote:
Here is my attempt to a pure Ad mech list for semi competitive games, what do you think about it?

Mars detachment:

- Cawl
- 4 Dakkabots
- Onager icarus
- Onager neutron

Stygies VIII detachment:

- TPE
- TPE
- 3x5 rangers (3 electro rifles)
- 4 Dragoons (infiltrated)

Super heavy detachment:

- IK crusader: Thermal canon, avenger, stormspear

2000 pts - 9PC

For pickup games in your local FLGS I’m sure this will do fine. Looks quite a fun list to play. I run a knight in most of my lists however and it does tend to be more often than not the cause of my undoing. As long as your not playing a super evil list you will probably have a fun game regardless. And if your bread is buttered to a more competitive taste then I would glance back at some of the more tournament refined lists that have been posted of late. GL

 Ideasweasel wrote:

HeavenLord wrote:
Here is my attempt to a pure Ad mech list for semi competitive games, what do you think about it?

Mars detachment:

- Cawl
- 4 Dakkabots
- Onager icarus
- Onager neutron

Stygies VIII detachment:

- TPE
- TPE
- 3x5 rangers (3 electro rifles)
- 4 Dragoons (infiltrated)

Super heavy detachment:

- IK crusader: Thermal canon, avenger, stormspear

2000 pts - 9PC

For pickup games in your local FLGS I’m sure this will do fine. Looks quite a fun list to play. I run a knight in most of my lists however and it does tend to be more often than not the cause of my undoing. As long as your not playing a super evil list you will probably have a fun game regardless. And if your bread is buttered to a more competitive taste then I would glance back at some of the more tournament refined lists that have been posted of late. GL

Same thoughts. Looks fun when not in a hyper-competitive environment and is still pretty darn trim. Crusader was the best choice and that is the optimal set-up, imo. Hopefully Knights get a buff soon to help you out.

I also hope that they introduce improvements to the standard Knights. AdMech is really good at supporting a singleton Knight (Master of Machines + Tech-Adept, Knight of the Cog, Machine Spirit Resurgent, Rotate Ion Shields), but 500+ points is a wound magnet.

I see a problem: we don't get enough out of our knights per point spent

Solution A: Make knights more resilient to both shooting and melee. More durability can justify the point cost.

Solution B: Make knights cheaper. A cheaper cost can justify the durability and damage they inflict per turn.

Solution C: Increase their damage output. Glass cannon approach. This is finicky but might be the easiest way to still make Knights fair. Increasing their durability might be a bit too heavy of an approach.

The knight melee weapons need to be made near-free, or the stomp attacks need to be made as an 'in-addition' attack similar to Cawl's tentacles. That the sword costs 15 points less than the meltagunCannon, but you will never use the sword, forces you to always take crusaders.

Wulfey wrote:
The knight melee weapons need to be made near-free, or the stomp attacks need to be made as an 'in-addition' attack similar to Cawl's tentacles. That the sword costs 15 points less than the meltagunCannon, but you will never use the sword, forces you to always take crusaders.

Bingo. Zero reason to take any other variant beyond cost. Making the chainsword free even might not sway me, since shooting is king.

 LexOdin9 wrote:
I see a problem: we don't get enough out of our knights per point spent

Solution A: Make knights more resilient to both shooting and melee. More durability can justify the point cost.

Solution B: Make knights cheaper. A cheaper cost can justify the durability and damage they inflict per turn.

Solution C: Increase their damage output. Glass cannon approach. This is finicky but might be the easiest way to still make Knights fair. Increasing their durability might be a bit too heavy of an approach.

I agree that those are the solutions but I really hope it isn't solution C it ends up being (assuming they even get better) Things die easy enough in 8th and I don't really like the idea of the knight either being amazing on turn one or dead, depending on who goes first. Give it a 2+ save, some extra wounds, make the chassi cheaper.

As for close combat, I sort of hope that the CC weapons get a major discount along with the fact that the big knights get 6 attacks and the feet double their attacks, rather than triple. And an invuln in close combat, obviously

the big knights only get 4 attacks don't they?

 em_en_oh_pee wrote:

Wulfey wrote:
The knight melee weapons need to be made near-free, or the stomp attacks need to be made as an 'in-addition' attack similar to Cawl's tentacles. That the sword costs 15 points less than the meltagunCannon, but you will never use the sword, forces you to always take crusaders.

Bingo. Zero reason to take any other variant beyond cost. Making the chainsword free even might not sway me, since shooting is king.

Or something like: "you make 2 additional attacks with this weapon" added to the melee weapon options.

Right now from what I've seen on the tables at my LGS Knights are good to send in the middle of the opposing army in the hopes it deals some damage before exploding magnificently.

Just adding a free ability to the Knights will change their points cost, and having a melee weapon as a trigger could shift the tendency away from Crusaders. Though do think a shift from weapons to core would help here too - especially as we're not really paying for a generic knight. Two ranged weapons could easily come at a premium.

 em_en_oh_pee wrote:

Wulfey wrote:
The knight melee weapons need to be made near-free, or the stomp attacks need to be made as an 'in-addition' attack similar to Cawl's tentacles. That the sword costs 15 points less than the meltagunCannon, but you will never use the sword, forces you to always take crusaders.

Bingo. Zero reason to take any other variant beyond cost. Making the chainsword free even might not sway me, since shooting is king.

As a person who works in game design, the easiest solution here is to nerf Stomp.

But yeah, I think Knights need another defensive stratagem or a bodyguard unit. (Cough. Secutarii. Cough.)

Suzuteo wrote:

 em_en_oh_pee wrote:

Wulfey wrote:
The knight melee weapons need to be made near-free, or the stomp attacks need to be made as an 'in-addition' attack similar to Cawl's tentacles. That the sword costs 15 points less than the meltagunCannon, but you will never use the sword, forces you to always take crusaders.

Bingo. Zero reason to take any other variant beyond cost. Making the chainsword free even might not sway me, since shooting is king.

As a person who works in game design, the easiest solution here is to nerf Stomp.

But yeah, I think Knights need another defensive stratagem or a bodyguard unit. (Cough. Secutarii. Cough.)

Forgeworld units will never be the balancing tool used to make a GW unit stronger.

But it would be pretty cool if the Secutarii could tank hits for an IK on a 2+.

They had this ability in 7E to Smoke Launcher an allied Super-Heavy instead of shooting. That was useful. (Cawlstar with 20 Secutarii + Knight Crusader in WarCon was pretty hot.)

It also depends on where they slot in the new Castellan, if they lower the cost of the other knights and the Castellan basically replaces the decked-out crusader at 600 points it could actually be useful if you get first turn and a bit scary for the opponent to fire at even if they get turn one because of machine spirit resurgence and rotate ion shields and the fact that they're probably more durable than the other big knights.

If the Castellan is 600 points and they lower the kitted crusader to like 475 and scale the other accordingly I can actually see some people taking knights again, assuming they get some other fixes, but if they remain unchanged in points and the armigers stay at 240 and the castellan is 800-ish then fun games and looking cool in the cabinet it is.

I just hope that it's obvious by the launch of the Castellan if it's one of those kits that will be expanded in a few months so it feels like a bit of a rip to buy this one. I'll be buying one for the looks of it but the peswsimist in me thinks it'll rarely see the table.

Similary to what someone said before, increase Attacks to 5 and nerf the stomp to only *2 hit rolls would be the easiest way to balance the close combat capabilities of the knights. 5 attacks with sword or gauntlet or 10 stomps. With 5 attacks and only 10 with stomp take a c/c weapon and actually use it it's an interesting option.

Nowaways I'm playing an styrix warlord just because it have invulnerable save during combat phase. I'ts also the warlord with 6+++ and relic sword. Rotating ion shields all turns it's not half bad as a dristraccion carnifex with T8 and 3++(4++ in c/c)/6+++. But his damage output sucks so bad.

Zorninsson wrote:
Similary to what someone said before, increase Attacks to 5 and nerf the stomp to only *2 hit rolls would be the easiest way to balance the close combat capabilities of the knights. 5 attacks with sword or gauntlet or 10 stomps. With 5 attacks and only 10 with stomp take a c/c weapon and actually use it it's an interesting option.

Nowaways I'm playing an styrix warlord just because it have invulnerable save during combat phase. I'ts also the warlord with 6+++ and relic sword. Rotating ion shields all turns it's not half bad as a dristraccion carnifex with T8 and 3++(4++ in c/c)/6+++. But his damage output sucks so bad.

What else are you bringing with it? Admech or backed up by more knights? (Currently)

They should let us bring double Avenger Knights. I don't know why Renegades get all the cool toys. =(

Suzuteo wrote:
They should let us bring double Avenger Knights. I don't know why Renegades get all the cool toys. =(

It looks cool I guess, but personally I don't mind chaos getting a different flavour of knights. There doesn't have to be a 100% parity in my opinion. More than that, the avenger gatling cannon is quite similar in stats to heavy phosphor blasters, so that's really the weapon I'm least interested in stats-wise. (It's a lot cooler looking than the PVC pipe rapid fire battlecannon though)

I just love the look of the wardens fist. Shame the rules are pants

Suzuteo wrote:

Bingo. Zero reason to take any other variant beyond cost. Making the chainsword free even might not sway me, since shooting is king.

As a person who works in game design, the easiest solution here is to nerf Stomp.