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.

I was always under the idea that "Knight" was a designation for Titan size/type, like "Warhound" or "Reaver."

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
You would dispute that having more than 1 unit in an army's codex would be better?

I would argue that a lot of the current Codexes out there would be a lot better if they had a lot fewer units in them.

Is "one" the magic number? I don't know. I'll give it a try, before I pass judgement. It certainly feels a lot better than the convoluted mess of ... say ... the Tyranid Codex.

Either way, I would dispute that more rules (!) in a book are a good thing. Which is something other than more units. I am sorry if I didn't make that distinction clear enough.

 Accolade wrote:
I was always under the idea that "Knight" was a designation for Titan size/type, like "Warhound" or "Reaver."

They also have void shields, that's the defining feature of a mechanicum titan but whatever not getting a semantics argument for the 400th time about this. Granted, its pretty hilarious that Knights have BETTER void shields than titans. Who the hell cares about an AV12 one use shield when you got a 4++ ??

 Zweischneid wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
You would dispute that having more than 1 unit in an army's codex would be better?

I would argue that a lot of the current Codexes out there would be a lot better if they had a lot fewer units in them.

Is "one" the magic number? I don't know. I'll give it a try, before I pass judgement. It certainly feels a lot better than the convoluted mess of ... say ... the Tyranid Codex.

Except the problem with the Tyranid codex isn't too many units, it's internal imbalance. FWIW, the 'nid codex has 29 units in not counting uniques (like OOE or the red terror).

Either way, I would dispute that more rules (!) in a book are a good thing. Which is something other than more units. I am sorry if I didn't make that distinction clear enough.

In the context of 40k as a whole I think many people would argue that it needs less convolution in it's rules. However we are discussing a codex, the implication of "more rules" in the context of a codex typically means people want more units and more options for those units.

They had some sort of ion shields instead according to the wiki article I linked earlier in the thread.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
However we are discussing a codex, the implication of "more rules" in the context of a codex typically means people want more units and more options for those units.

Fair enough. Not the implication I read. Many of the Codex Supplement discussions have similarly revolved around "not enough" (or "too many"?), rules, including things like Warlord Traits, unique items, FOC-swaps, Psychic Powers, etc... The Farsight Supplement had far too many rules for my taste. The Iyanden Supplement was managing the fluff-crunch-balance a bit better IMO. But they are not "Codex" in the strictest sense I suppose.

But if "more rules" literally means "more units" to you, than yes, I'd agree with you (to an extend... as there is such a thing as diminishing returns, over-saturation,etc..).

 Kirasu wrote:

 Accolade wrote:
I was always under the idea that "Knight" was a designation for Titan size/type, like "Warhound" or "Reaver."

They also have void shields, that's the defining feature of a mechanicum titan but whatever not getting a semantics argument for the 400th time about this. Granted, its pretty hilarious that Knights have BETTER void shields than titans. Who the hell cares about an AV12 one use shield when you got a 4++ ??

They're Ion Shields, and they're not "better" than Titans' Void Shields(unless Void Shields have changed significantly since last I had read them).

They cover a quarter of the model and the Knight player "sets" the shield before the enemy's Shooting Phase and before any shooting attacks are carried out.

The quarters are front, left, right, or rear and the Ion Shield's 4+ Invulnerable save cannot be used against close combat attacks.

A Size comparison pic between the 28mm DFG Crusader and the GW Knight. This was posted over on the Dream-Forge Games Artists Retreat Facebook page by Mark Addams.
Crusader is on a slightly elevated base, so add maybe half inch to the Knight.

ski2060 wrote:
Crusader is on a slightly elevated base, so add maybe half inch to the Knight.

I don't think that's necessary as the Knight is on an XBox game case which appears to be the same size as the Leviathan's built up base.

Think the Crusader would fit on the Knight base? Looks like it should be ok-ish.

On a related note, where can you get seperate Knight bases....

 Orlanth wrote:
The unit is called an "Imperial Knight" in the codex.

It is also called "Imperial Knight Titan" on the back of the box because the name "Imperial Knight" is too generic for enforceable IP copyright.

Does that mean, anyone can now produce an "Imperial Knight", as long as they don't print "Imperial Knight Titan" on the back of the box?
Does that also mean, that for the first time, the background was (re)written by the GW legal team, that proved so successfull in the Chapterhouse lawsuit?

BTW where is Platuan4th?

 Kroothawk wrote:

Does that mean, anyone can now produce an "Imperial Knight", as long as they don't print "Imperial Knight Titan" on the back of the box?
Does that also mean, that for the first time, the background was (re)written by the GW legal team, that proved so successfull in the Chapterhouse lawsuit?

Does possibly having case law on your side mean anything in terms of preventing C&D letters and costly legal battles that you can't afford? Unless you've got probono defense already lined up from a top firm, I don't think it means anything. YMMV.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Kirasu wrote:

 Accolade wrote:
I was always under the idea that "Knight" was a designation for Titan size/type, like "Warhound" or "Reaver."

They also have void shields, that's the defining feature of a mechanicum titan but whatever not getting a semantics argument for the 400th time about this. Granted, its pretty hilarious that Knights have BETTER void shields than titans. Who the hell cares about an AV12 one use shield when you got a 4++ ??

They're Ion Shields, and they're not "better" than Titans' Void Shields(unless Void Shields have changed significantly since last I had read them).

They cover a quarter of the model and the Knight player "sets" the shield before the enemy's Shooting Phase and before any shooting attacks are carried out.

The quarters are front, left, right, or rear and the Ion Shield's 4+ Invulnerable save cannot be used against close combat attacks.

If you play a lot of apoc then YES the Ion shield is vastly superior to void shields. The further distance you are from the enemy the larger your front arc is. I'd take a direction 4++ over 1-3 void shields any day of the week. Void shields also don't work in CC so that point of moot, unsure why you included it. It's flat out better in almost all relevant circumstances.

 bubber wrote:
I am assuming that a knight army can take allies like imperial guard. If so, how about these instead of Cadians:

They're cheaper too!

Dave Taylor did a great IG army back in the day using the Bretonnian Men-at-Arms kits. Will need access to IG arms, but straight forward for basic conversions.

Those are epic!

Isn't that Our Dave Taylor? he is a member of Dakka

Back on topic Imperial Knights are cool I want 5 or 6 of them

 sonofruss wrote:
Isn't that Our Dave Taylor? he is a member of Dakka

Back on topic Imperial Knights are cool I want 5 or 6 of them

Someone at my FLGS bought 7 of them the other day...

I wish GW didn't feth over my FLGS and had them available today as promised, instead of just for their stores, the curs.

 BrookM wrote:
I wish GW didn't feth over my FLGS and had them available today as promised, instead of just for their stores, the curs.

I don't think GW stores had that many either. My local GW only had two left come 1030.

One of the staff mentioned something about a shipment to the USA being held up/ going astray meaning others had to be diverted to cover orders resulting in everyone being spread thinly. Add salt according to taste of course....

My local shop had shipment issues, so only a few knights avail.

Both the US and UK sites have a one to two week delay on dispatch. They wouldn't feth themselves over if they weren't genuinely thin on the ground, for whatever reason.

 azreal13 wrote:
Both the US and UK sites have a one to two week delay on dispatch. They wouldn't feth themselves over if they weren't genuinely thin on the ground, for whatever reason.

Though, I feel they are their own worst enemy at times.

 sonofruss wrote:
Isn't that Our Dave Taylor? he is a member of Dakka

Back on topic Imperial Knights are cool I want 5 or 6 of them

Yup. Sadly not much on them over on his blog. A couple pics, but not much.

3000 units meant for the North American market supposedly got stranded during transit due to weather. GW apparently pulled 1500 meant for UK/Europe and air shipped them to the US. That is explaining the shortages.

Those monsters..

i really want to see a side by side of the imperial knight and the 15mm leviathan models.

 bubber wrote:
Those are epic!

no they look 28mm to me.








Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DJGietzen wrote:
i really want to see a side by side of the imperial knight and the 15mm leviathan models.

Same here.

First0f0ne wrote:

 bubber wrote:
Those are epic!

no they look 28mm to me.








Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DJGietzen wrote:
i really want to see a side by side of the imperial knight and the 15mm leviathan models.

Same here.

I have a feeling it'll happen very soon.

 DJGietzen wrote:
i really want to see a side by side of the imperial knight and the 15mm leviathan models.

i havent put mine together yet but the 15mm box says the model measures 4.5 inches tall

 ironicsilence wrote:

 DJGietzen wrote:
i really want to see a side by side of the imperial knight and the 15mm leviathan models.

i havent put mine together yet but the 15mm box says the model measures 4.5 inches tall

Or an imperial knight next to warmachines galleon or conquest. The price comparison has already been made, i think they have a really close fit in size.

 Mr. Grey wrote:

 sonofruss wrote:
Isn't that Our Dave Taylor? he is a member of Dakka

Back on topic Imperial Knights are cool I want 5 or 6 of them

Someone at my FLGS bought 7 of them the other day...

That would be me
Few for me...few to paint and sell
David was quite happy hehehe