Switch Theme:

Is it rude to run Imperial/Chaos Questores Knights in a casual or below 1250pt games?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Dakka Veteran





Is it not kosher to run Imperial Knights under 1250pts games?

If a casual list has an Imperial Knight, is it considered, try hard at winning therefore no longer a casual army list?

If some one tries to fit 2 or 3 imperial knights into a 1250-1500pt army game, is that no longer casual or chill? And does it warrant heavy list tailoring such as swap all weapons for meltas to kill the knights.

In the Grimdark future of DerpHammer40k, there are only dank memes! 
   
Made in ca
Deadshot Weapon Moderati




It's not rude, although you probably want to check with your opponent before in a casual situation about what they would like to face. It's kinda boring though. Knights are just big boring bricks.
   
Made in us
The Marine Standing Behind Marneus Calgar





Upstate, New York

Knights are inherently a skew list.

Adding one to a 1,500 or 2k list should not be an issue. At that level, even a general TAC should be able to deal with it.

But at lower levels it’s going to be very list dependent. Hard to make sweeping generalizations. And multiples at low points could get very un-fun.

They are part of the game, for better or for worse. But I’d not drop a knight list on someone as a suprise. YMMV.

   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




What list isn't a skew list in w40k? There is only armies that are good over all and all or most of the time, and bad lists. The very idea that in a casual setting, where winning is suppose to not matter, there are units or armies that are not acceptable is just mind blowing.

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in us
The Marine Standing Behind Marneus Calgar





Upstate, New York

Karol wrote:
What list isn't a skew list in w40k? There is only armies that are good over all and all or most of the time, and bad lists. The very idea that in a casual setting, where winning is suppose to not matter, there are units or armies that are not acceptable is just mind blowing.


40k is best when both players on on the same level about what kind of game they want. Sometimes that involves having a conversation with your opponent and either toning down or ramping up your list so both are roughly equal. Nobody wants a one sided stomp fest. Well, some people might, but most I think would rather invest the time spent on the game to be fun.

   
Made in us
Deathwing Terminator with Assault Cannon






Karol wrote:
What list isn't a skew list in w40k? There is only armies that are good over all and all or most of the time, and bad lists. The very idea that in a casual setting, where winning is suppose to not matter, there are units or armies that are not acceptable is just mind blowing.
You're mistaking a [competitive list] being synonymous to a [skew list]. A competitive list can be a skew list but not all competitive lists are skew list. Not all rectangles are squares.

Skew lists are generally impossible to win against unless specifically tailored to counter it. A good example of it would be the early 9th hellhound leafblower that got countered by BA jumppack army.

This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2022/09/09 15:03:11


 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




Karol wrote:
What list isn't a skew list in w40k? There is only armies that are good over all and all or most of the time, and bad lists. The very idea that in a casual setting, where winning is suppose to not matter, there are units or armies that are not acceptable is just mind blowing.

The vast majority of 40k lists are not skew. Just because winning may not be the most important thing in a casual game, doesn't mean all armies are equally valid for all people. Fun is the most important thing and if bringing a certain style of list can reduce that fun that can be a problem for many people.

Knights are often problematic, not necessarily from a competitive standpoint, but from one of engagement and fun. Having an army that's all one, very unusual, statline that renders much of your army useless isn't much fun. Note, this was true even when Knights were terrible and easy to beat. Winning the game was still boring because playing the game was boring.
   
Made in gb
Slaanesh Chosen Marine Riding a Fiend





No, sod 'em. Take whatever you want. It is your army and if the opponent doesn't like it just find another.

They aren't invincible kill machines.

Please note, for those of you who play Chaos Daemons as a faction the term "Daemon" is potentially offensive. Instead, please play codex "Chaos: Mortally Challenged". Thank you. 
   
Made in us
Deathwing Terminator with Assault Cannon






 CadianGateTroll wrote:
Is it not kosher to run Imperial Knights under 1250pts games?

If a casual list has an Imperial Knight, is it considered, try hard at winning therefore no longer a casual army list?

If some one tries to fit 2 or 3 imperial knights into a 1250-1500pt army game, is that no longer casual or chill? And does it warrant heavy list tailoring such as swap all weapons for meltas to kill the knights.
More like, if you bring a knights list and argue that you don't want to play with any terrains since you don't benefit from it anyways and would like a full vision of the entire board so you can kill your opponent's army in a single turn, then yes.

Otherwise, a good terrain placement evens out the odds in the long run (as in turn 3-4) when you actually play the game and play objectives even if the opponent's list is not fully tailored to counter the knights.

The game is actually about board control. Killing units is simply offensive means to prevent opponent's map control.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/09/09 15:11:02


 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka




NE Ohio, USA

I'll assume that by Knight you do not mean Armigars.

To date I've not had any problems facing Knights (of any size) in any lv of the game.
Most of my wins against them have been VP based.
Several have been by tabling (or near tabling) them - wich of course results in me getting more vp....

The last game against them?
My khorne demons:
1 bloodthirster/3x3 juggernaugts/1 herald of khorne/2×10 bloodletters/2× skullcannon
Shredded:
3 shooty Armigers, 1 melee oriented Warden(?) & 1 very shooty big Knight (Castellon?) None of it was FW.
*sorry, I never remember the names of the knights.

The game ended (for any practical purpose) on turn 3.
Turn 4 & 5 was just me sucking up more vp & hunting down a lone Armigar.


Now, what was someone saying about Knights being a skew list, & skew lists being impossible to win against?
   
Made in us
Arch Magos w/ 4 Meg of RAM






ccs wrote:


Now, what was someone saying about Knights being a skew list, & skew lists being impossible to win against?


except you brought what counters knights lol.

High AP melee
   
Made in us
Deathwing Terminator with Assault Cannon






ccs wrote:
The last game against them?
My khorne demons:
1 bloodthirster/3x3 juggernaugts/1 herald of khorne/2×10 bloodletters/2× skullcannon
Shredded:
3 shooty Armigers, 1 melee oriented Warden(?) & 1 very shooty big Knight (Castellon?) None of it was FW.
*sorry, I never remember the names of the knights.

The game ended (for any practical purpose) on turn 3.
Turn 4 & 5 was just me sucking up more vp & hunting down a lone Armigar.

Now, what was someone saying about Knights being a skew list, & skew lists being impossible to win against?
In case you've missed it, smash captain is hard counter to knights and you have 5 units that essentially function as one.
   
Made in us
Boom! Leman Russ Commander





 NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote:
No, sod 'em. Take whatever you want. It is your army and if the opponent doesn't like it just find another.

They aren't invincible kill machines.

That attitude a good way to run out of people willing to play you fast.
   
Made in us
Mekboy on Kustom Deth Kopta






I feel like when somebody agrees to play me I owe them a good game. Showing up with a imperial knight in a low point game without letting them have some idea there will be one seems like a recipe for them to have a bad time as they might not be able to do anything about it.

My personal method would be to let them know beforehand and if it is a knight ally, or full knight list. if you need to change anything to be able to deal with it offering them the opportunity to switch things up to adapt. Will the overcompensate and go all low volume high str low AP or just add a few. It would be interesting to see how they modify.

10000 points 7000
6000
5000
5000
2000
 
   
Made in it
Growlin' Guntrukk Driver with Killacannon





Italy

Great advice, if you plan on running a knight for casual games it's good to let your opponent know ahead of time that way they have some way to deal with it.

In 7th edition many armies struggled with Knights and they earned quite a bit of long lasting ire as a result. They're much easier to fight nowadays.
   
Made in gb
Malicious Mandrake




It's prefectly legal I understand.

If someone tries to fit 2 or 3 imperial knights into a 1250-1500pt army game, I would give them the Richard Cranium award and decline the game.
   
Made in us
Deathwing Terminator with Assault Cannon






I'll generally mention in advance if I'm running super-heavies, aircraft or something like drop pod assault.

My group has a house rule that a single unit can't be more than 50% of the total PL for the army - so an exception would be OK'd in advance.
   
Made in nl
Longtime Dakkanaut





Karol wrote:
What list isn't a skew list in w40k? There is only armies that are good over all and all or most of the time, and bad lists. The very idea that in a casual setting, where winning is suppose to not matter, there are units or armies that are not acceptable is just mind blowing.
Casual is less about 'winning doesn't matter' and more about both sides having fun. Getting 2 Knights you didn't bring enough AT to deal with shoved in your face is generally not considered 'fun'.

And yes you can argue your opponent should have brought more AT. I refer you to point 1, 'both sides having fun'.
Ask your opponent, and then everything is fine.
   
Made in us
Infiltrating Broodlord





United States

 CadianGateTroll wrote:
Is it not kosher to run Imperial Knights under 1250pts games?

If a casual list has an Imperial Knight, is it considered, try hard at winning therefore no longer a casual army list?

If some one tries to fit 2 or 3 imperial knights into a 1250-1500pt army game, is that no longer casual or chill? And does it warrant heavy list tailoring such as swap all weapons for meltas to kill the knights.


No.

Ayn Rand "We can evade reality, but we cannot evade the consequences of evading reality" 
   
Made in es
Dakka Veteran




According to the average dakkanout playing 9th ed is rude by it self, so playing a knights list in a "small" game must be some sort of war crime.
   
Made in de
Witch Hunter in the Shadows



Aachen

The best advice i can give on this is: Dont ask the Internet, ask the people you plan on playing with.

That being said - In my local group its considered rude to bring massively skewed lists to casual games without announcing it beforehand. The other Player can then decide if they want to play vs knights or 3 Land raider or not. Communication is key

In competitive games (we have a Club League, for example) its totally accepted and expected.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/09/12 19:13:32


 
   
Made in de
Ladies Love the Vibro-Cannon Operator






Hamburg

A Knight will definitely be hard to kill in a small pt game.
See Lanchester square law.

Former moderator 40kOnline

Lanchester's square law - please obey in list building!

Illumini: "And thank you for not finishing your post with a "" I'm sorry, but after 7200 's that has to be the most annoying sign-off ever."

Armies: Eldar, Necrons, Blood Angels, Grey Knights; World Eaters (30k); Bloodbound; Cryx, Circle, Cyriss 
   
Made in de
Mysterious Techpriest






So is it rude to bring 4 Leman Russes too then?
2 Land Raiders? 2 Land Fortresses?

I dont get it tbh. If someone wants to play knights, he plays knights. If he brings 2 or 3 big ones, laugh as you win the game. If he brings Armigers, whats the problem?
Knights arent the boogeyman they once were. Thats the upside of "everything can hurt everything". You probably wont table the opponent, but you'll outscore him pretty much everywhere. There's a reason people play a max of 2, most even 1 knight at 2k because they can't play the mission. Adding 1 knight is about the same as adding 3 leman russes. You wont berate someone for bringing 3 russes.

Data author for Battlescribe
Found a bug? Join, ask, report:
https://discord.gg/pMXqCqWJRE 
   
Made in de
Witch Hunter in the Shadows



Aachen

 Thairne wrote:
So is it rude to bring 4 Leman Russes too then?
2 Land Raiders? 2 Land Fortresses?

I dont get it tbh. If someone wants to play knights, he plays knights. If he brings 2 or 3 big ones, laugh as you win the game. If he brings Armigers, whats the problem?
Knights arent the boogeyman they once were. Thats the upside of "everything can hurt everything". You probably wont table the opponent, but you'll outscore him pretty much everywhere. There's a reason people play a max of 2, most even 1 knight at 2k because they can't play the mission. Adding 1 knight is about the same as adding 3 leman russes. You wont berate someone for bringing 3 russes.


Both players are there to enjoy the game. If you skew, talk to the other Person if theyre fine with that. If you want to play knights at 1k the easiest way to make sure the other player will also enjoy the game is to talk to them beforehand.

Id suggest doing that whenever youre bringing a skew list. For casual games, of course.

Generally speaking... Why argue against this? Taking to the other person is always better than not doing so. Why is your "right" to bring skew more important than the other players enjoyment of the game, and their right to outright refuse the match once they see your list and decide "na, i dont want to play that"?

In my experience people are mostly fine with skew lists if you ask them beforehand, and even if they did refuse theres no bad blood. But if its just sprung on them as a surprise the reactions are much less friendly.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/09/13 13:52:28


 
   
Made in us
Deathwing Terminator with Assault Cannon






There's a limit to how much you can "discuss beforehand" about your list I'm afraid. It usually boils down to player 1 disclosing their skew list, the player 2 remaking their list to tailor against such skew list, player 1 revising their skew list to deal with player 2's list, player 2 re-revising their list to tailor against player 1's revised list and so on and so forth.

There's really no way to "balance the game" so everyone is "having fun" at all times. Sometimes you run into some BS lists - you can either choose to play against it or not. There is no "social norm/obligation" on disclosing your skew list, even at casual level.

Discussing beforehand so that "everyone is having fun" is practically agreeing to pull your punches. If everyone's ok with that, then great. If not, that's ok too.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/09/13 21:31:33


 
   
Made in de
Mysterious Techpriest






nekooni wrote:
 Thairne wrote:
So is it rude to bring 4 Leman Russes too then?
2 Land Raiders? 2 Land Fortresses?

I dont get it tbh. If someone wants to play knights, he plays knights. If he brings 2 or 3 big ones, laugh as you win the game. If he brings Armigers, whats the problem?
Knights arent the boogeyman they once were. Thats the upside of "everything can hurt everything". You probably wont table the opponent, but you'll outscore him pretty much everywhere. There's a reason people play a max of 2, most even 1 knight at 2k because they can't play the mission. Adding 1 knight is about the same as adding 3 leman russes. You wont berate someone for bringing 3 russes.


Both players are there to enjoy the game. If you skew, talk to the other Person if theyre fine with that. If you want to play knights at 1k the easiest way to make sure the other player will also enjoy the game is to talk to them beforehand.

Id suggest doing that whenever youre bringing a skew list. For casual games, of course.

Generally speaking... Why argue against this? Taking to the other person is always better than not doing so. Why is your "right" to bring skew more important than the other players enjoyment of the game, and their right to outright refuse the match once they see your list and decide "na, i dont want to play that"?

In my experience people are mostly fine with skew lists if you ask them beforehand, and even if they did refuse theres no bad blood. But if its just sprung on them as a surprise the reactions are much less friendly.


What skchasan said.
Everytime I say "I bring (a) knight(s)" I suddenly face down a tremendous amount of AT power to the point that I get tabled T3 at the latest. In 8th, that is. Or why when I say "I bring custodes" suddenly those lightning claws are all thunder hammers. Strange coincidence, no?
Knights and Custodes are the type of army where you give your opponent basically all the information he needs because there is close to zero variability in them and there's an optimum loadout
That's why. You tell the other player basically what he needs to beat you. If you cant handle knights, maybe try a more balanced list, because then you couldn't handle a lot of other lists as well.
Why should I give the opponent the inherent advantage every time because of the army I like to play? I havent seen anyone get riffed on because he plays some kind of tide, making all my AT weaponry entirely useless.

Also, again, what is the difference between a knight and 3 Leman Russes? Why is one acceptable and the other not?
Bias. Because "big stompy knight" was a thing before 8th dropped and you LITERALLY got boned against such lists. Not in 9th tho, which makes the entire argument fly out the window imo.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/09/14 20:33:05


Data author for Battlescribe
Found a bug? Join, ask, report:
https://discord.gg/pMXqCqWJRE 
   
Made in us
Confessor Of Sins





Tacoma, WA, USA

Not discussing your list ahead of time just delays the point where your opponent says, "I don't think I will have fun in this game, so I'm going to pass".

It could be before you decide to get together to play a game.
It could be once you are at the gaming venue and you give the most basic description of your list.
It could be when you are at the table pulling models and passing a copy of your list to your opponent.
It could be after Turn 1 (or 2 or 3) when they decide "I have no chance of winning this or even having fun losing".
It could be after the game when they say "that was a waste of time, I don't even know why I bothered to play".

The question is when would you rather that happen?

As for your opponent going hard AT on you, discussion is a 2 way street.
   
Made in us
Hurr! Ogryn Bone 'Ead!





 Thairne wrote:
...maybe try a more balanced list, because then you couldn't handle a lot of other lists as well...

Last I checked, the point of skew lists was to stack one unit type/defensive profile so heavily because a TAC list would be unable to effectively handle it. Especially at lower point levels. Which this thread is about.

Also, I don't have any numbers on this, but you don't need to kill three Leman Russes to remove them as a threat, and I can't imagine that bracketing three Russes is harder than taking a Knight down (especially since you can bodyblock Russes from moving to more advantageous positions, and don't you guys have a Strat to make a Knight ignore their current bracket anyways?). You can cry "Bias!" all you like, but without some hard evidence either way my claim is at least as likely as yours.
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle





In My Lab

 waefre_1 wrote:
 Thairne wrote:
...maybe try a more balanced list, because then you couldn't handle a lot of other lists as well...

Last I checked, the point of skew lists was to stack one unit type/defensive profile so heavily because a TAC list would be unable to effectively handle it. Especially at lower point levels. Which this thread is about.

Also, I don't have any numbers on this, but you don't need to kill three Leman Russes to remove them as a threat, and I can't imagine that bracketing three Russes is harder than taking a Knight down (especially since you can bodyblock Russes from moving to more advantageous positions, and don't you guys have a Strat to make a Knight ignore their current bracket anyways?). You can cry "Bias!" all you like, but without some hard evidence either way my claim is at least as likely as yours.
Leman Russes are actually a bit tougher, wound to wound, than a Knight.

T8 2+ AoC vs. T8 3+/5++

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in us
Hurr! Ogryn Bone 'Ead!





 JNAProductions wrote:
 waefre_1 wrote:
 Thairne wrote:
...maybe try a more balanced list, because then you couldn't handle a lot of other lists as well...

Last I checked, the point of skew lists was to stack one unit type/defensive profile so heavily because a TAC list would be unable to effectively handle it. Especially at lower point levels. Which this thread is about.

Also, I don't have any numbers on this, but you don't need to kill three Leman Russes to remove them as a threat, and I can't imagine that bracketing three Russes is harder than taking a Knight down (especially since you can bodyblock Russes from moving to more advantageous positions, and don't you guys have a Strat to make a Knight ignore their current bracket anyways?). You can cry "Bias!" all you like, but without some hard evidence either way my claim is at least as likely as yours.
Leman Russes are actually a bit tougher, wound to wound, than a Knight.

T8 2+ AoC vs. T8 3+/5++

OK, so slightly tougher to bracket all three Russes but still much easier to bracket each individually for immediate returns (and AFAIK still no invuln to fall back on for cheeky saves against superheavy AT, though I have to assume that GW isn't so far gone yet that one could expect to commonly see such weapons in casual/lower point level games).
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: