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.

4 Shot with Blast, these guys mean bussiness!

5" S9 blast on those conversion beamers at long range... that looks fun too!

Not too shabby at all. That conversion beamer cannon of the Asterios is nicely done - larger blast at longer range.

Chopstick wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

Chopstick wrote:
Lol @ that guy, The kit aren't similar to Warhound. Warhound is 3 different sprues (which mean triple the molds) with 2 Hounds, you can't separated a single hound from that kit.

The kit is similar to other knights and specialist game release, 1 sprue, now double up for AT, always were double up for Necromunda and Blood Bowl, just the price also got a jump.

He meant they're similar to Warhounds in that they're about the same size and you get two in a box.

It's a nonsensical comparison regardless, now that there are people out there actually beleive those same should have similar/slightly lower price point because they're 2 and at the same size, Warhound and Reaver both took 3 times the resource to make. This knight aint.

And if the price of GW kits was actually consistently linked to the amount of sprues in a box that would be a valid objection. Given GW's actual history of pricing things, however, fearing that two roughly Warhound-size models would cost the same as a box of two Warhounds despite all the various ways they're not like Warhounds otherwise was hardly unreasonable. As it turns out they don't, but they also cost an extra 50% over the other 2-sprue Knight boxes and they never weren't going to cost at least something more.

I'm pretty happy with £30 for a box, with them being so close to Warhounds in scale I was honestly expecting £35-40.

is this sprue frame still coming or part of a different release along the way?

They said that was coming both as part of a re-boxed Questoris kit and available separately like the titan weapons. Not sure when, but my money would be on August.

Different release it would seem.

Nice to see Acastus are 1-4 per Banner.

No rule for Helios Missile, What if a Thunderbolt or Hellblade want to bully my Warlord ;(

Those weapon profiles are...surprising. Seems like Reaver-level firepower. Guess the points values are the missing info at this point.

Chopstick wrote:
No rule for Helios Missile, What if a Thunderbolt or Hellblade want to bully my Warlord ;(

... yet. Aeronautica will (hopefully) change that

How come weapons points aren't on the terminal? Knights don't get cards, do they?

 lord_blackfang wrote:
How come weapons points aren't on the terminal? Knights don't get cards, do they?

The points are probably on the back of the terminal.

This dude is bad news walking!

50 US$ for the Acastus

Cheaper than buying 2 questoris box.

Chopstick wrote:


50 US$ for the Acastus

Cheaper than buying 2 questoris box.

Any idea why the terminal cards aren't listed under web exclusive anymore?

Let's hope they will be available via third parties. Fingers crossed!

 gorgon wrote:
Those weapon profiles are...surprising. Seems like Reaver-level firepower. Guess the points values are the missing info at this point.

My thoughts exactly. This thing just seems much shootier than its size would suggest. Its firepower is at least equal to a reaver titan.

It's weird. I don't mind knights getting a gun platform, if it's priced appropriately. But it's not quite believable. Why bother building titans with explosive plasma reactors, a crew of several people and all that stuff when you could just have one guy drive a smaller knight that somehow does more damage?

Because reavers have shields and more powerful armour. Plus their higher size makes them more suited to firing over things that the knight might not be able to see over. The knights pack a punch but they won't be able to take anywhere near as much in return fire.

Mandragola wrote:

 gorgon wrote:
Those weapon profiles are...surprising. Seems like Reaver-level firepower. Guess the points values are the missing info at this point.

My thoughts exactly. This thing just seems much shootier than its size would suggest. Its firepower is at least equal to a reaver titan.

It's weird. I don't mind knights getting a gun platform, if it's priced appropriately. But it's not quite believable. Why bother building titans with explosive plasma reactors, a crew of several people and all that stuff when you could just have one guy drive a smaller knight that somehow does more damage?

Seems more like you guys haven't been up to date with 40k stuff for a long time.

It's not a Knight problem, it's the Titan's problem, literally many unit from tiny Dreadnought, to tank and stuff can possibly fit in more guns in it than the Titans, the design is outdated.

Void shield and the ability to repair itself are still Titan's biggest feature. Knight just got withered down and wiped off the table in the long run.

Althought, I have to admit, 6 shot missile pod and 4 shot Magna Lascannon is nonsense lol, they didn't have that much shot in their 30k and 40k profile.

Can't wait to see what crazy rule they come up next for the Rapier titan, Atrapos and Dominus Knights.

Chopstick wrote:

Mandragola wrote:

 gorgon wrote:
Those weapon profiles are...surprising. Seems like Reaver-level firepower. Guess the points values are the missing info at this point.

My thoughts exactly. This thing just seems much shootier than its size would suggest. Its firepower is at least equal to a reaver titan.

It's weird. I don't mind knights getting a gun platform, if it's priced appropriately. But it's not quite believable. Why bother building titans with explosive plasma reactors, a crew of several people and all that stuff when you could just have one guy drive a smaller knight that somehow does more damage?

Seems more like you guys haven't been up to date with 40k stuff for a long time.

It's not a Knight problem, it's the Titan's problem, literally many unit from tiny Dreadnought, to tank and stuff can possibly fit in more guns in it than the Titans, the design is outdated.

Void shield and the ability to repair itself are still Titan's biggest feature. Knight just got withered down and wiped off the table in the long run.

Althought, I have to admit, 6 shot missile pod and 4 shot Magna Lascannon is nonsense lol, they didn't have that much shot in their 30k and 40k profile.

Can't wait to see what crazy rule they come up next for the Rapier titan, Atrapos and Dominus Knights.

This is my point though. It doesn't make sense that the little rocket pod on the Acastus is more powerful than the acastus missile launcher on a reaver, or that the knight's lasers - which are smaller than the reaver's, have longer range, no penalty to hit at range and (most weirdly) cause 3" blasts.

In theory the knight can be popped by a single crit. In reality it's hard for anything but a bellicosa to do that. You need a 17 to kill one so minimum S11 and the Acastus will be far away, behind a wall of angry charging knights.

If the Knights have Power Fish, then your Titan's nightmare has come true.

So I don't know how force-org works in the modern AT, but if I wanted four of these in a list. but also other small Knights, is that both legal an viable?

Nurglitch wrote:
If the Knights have Power Fish, then your Titan's nightmare has come true.

It'll be fearing for it's sole.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
So I don't know how force-org works in the modern AT, but if I wanted four of these in a list. but also other small Knights, is that both legal an viable?

Yes and yes. You'd need to form a lance (or multiple lances). A lance is three banners of Knights. The knights can be of any type, but each banner of knights have to be equipped in the same fashion. So, for example:

Banner of 3 Questoris Paladins
Banner of 2 Cerastus Lancers
Banners 4 Acastus Porphyrions

They die quickly, but can brutalise Titan's if they get in close.

I just read about "maniples" and am now more interested than before. I love the idea of just fielding Warhounds and Knights, as I just love them aesthetically.

I'm thinking 4-5 Warhounds and then loads of Knights would be fun. Hopefully it could still win games. ;-)

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
I just read about "maniples" and am now more interested than before. I love the idea of just fielding Warhounds and Knights, as I just love them aesthetically.

I'm thinking 4-5 Warhounds and then loads of Knights would be fun. Hopefully it could still win games. ;-)

A lupercal maniple (3-5 Warhounds) + 1-2 Knight Lances would be a scary force to face. Highly maneuverable, destructive, but fragile

A mandatory maniple and household Lance would make for a good general purpose force.

While the Acastus is all groovy at the moment, there was talk of a "Rapier" scout titan...it could be a foil for the Knights.

Chopstick wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

Mandragola wrote:
In my opionion the best way to get into the game is to get the rules box set and the battleforce - not the Grand Master Edition. This way is cheaper than the GME and gives you a better selection of models.
.

Also gives you just free warhounds vs free warlord. Now remind me which kit was more pricey?

It's not as simple as always get x. 2 things decide. Do you want that terrain and do you plan ever using moie than 1 warlord. If ye# to both gme saves more moeey

You also pay more to get that free warlord.

In the end it's either you want 2 warlord with zero options, or you want actual functioning maniple, with spare cash for knights, weapons option, and stuff.

Had anyone manage to make the 2 dual belicosa Warlord and 6 questoris knights list work?

And if you get all the other titans and 2nd warlord you end up paying less with the gme in the end. Again if you use terrain and 2nd warlord gme saves money. That's undisputable fact. Question thus is do you use those. If yes no twisting will make gme more exrensive for the end result. Yes initial price is higher but add in knights and 2nd warlord and you are more expensive.

Even "both warlords have same weapons" doesn't hold water as both original and new kit add on sprues cost same and even if you get mk2 warlord you need original weapon sprues or have crappy carapace. So mk1 plus mk2 sprue is same cost as mk2 and mk1 sprue.


It's real simple math

The GME is on LCTB.

tneva82 wrote:


And if you get all the other titans and 2nd warlord you end up paying less with the gme in the end. Again if you use terrain and 2nd warlord gme saves money. That's undisputable fact. Question thus is do you use those. If yes no twisting will make gme more exrensive for the end result. Yes initial price is higher but add in knights and 2nd warlord and you are more expensive.

Even "both warlords have same weapons" doesn't hold water as both original and new kit add on sprues cost same and even if you get mk2 warlord you need original weapon sprues or have crappy carapace. So mk1 plus mk2 sprue is same cost as mk2 and mk1 sprue.


It's real simple math

The only truth I see here is wheneever some one ask "how do I start AT?" I will never point them at the GME because that's not how you would start the game. For the same or lower budget you get something that is actually considered a "start"

GME is frankly...meant for Grand Master , it meant for people who have large budget that looking to expand their force.