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.

Just a quick question of fairness. If someone was fielding one or more Knights would you think it fair to let the opponent take a super heavy of their own? (baneblade, stompa etc)

I'd certainly allow it if I were bringing my knight, even if anything with multiple D-weapons would obliterate it. But things like baneblades/stompas would seem fair to me.

They can bring them anyway now.

Why do people make it seem as if the knights are overpowered? Even with the D strength CCW they're just good, not broken.

Knights having 6 hullpoints and front of lower than 14... Geeze Sush a scary unit! ..... it's new it's scary! RAAAAAAGE!
srsly guys... stop making a big fuzz.

Considering escalation is as optional as death from the skies, or any codex [its not optional unless you decide its optional]

I do not really understand why this is a question.

Would you let your opponent take a Tau army if you were playing eldar?

My opponent can take a superheavy even if I don't take a Knight, that's the whole point of Escalation right?

I'd like to try 2x Knights and a Shadowsword at 1500.

It's only an oversized dred. It's nothing as ridiculous as the Eldar titans.

Against other other superheavies no, its not great. But consider the Knights are NOT lords of war, and thus no need for escalation, and seem meant for more normal play, they are fantastic for their point costs.

They compare favorably to wraithknights in terms of battlefield roles.

They aren't superheavies? But they have the D.

 buddha wrote:
But consider the Knights are NOT lords of war, and thus no need for escalation, and seem meant for more normal play,

There is no such thing as a "need for escalation". Escalation is part of normal play just like C:SM. Your comment makes about as much sense as talking about how Riptides don't need C:SM, and therefore seem meant for more normal play than tactical squads.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
They aren't superheavies? But they have the D.

They are superheavies. Small ones, with only 6 HP, but still superheavy.

Considering a stock wraithknight can kill it with ease why Would there be a problem?

I think you'd come off looking like a real jerk if you walked to a gaming table, plunked down a knight and then told the other guy "I REFUSE TO AGREE TO USE OF ESCALATION!"


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ClassicCarraway wrote:
Considering a stock wraithknight can kill it with ease why Would there be a problem?

except that's not true.

let's look at a stock wraightknight vs a Knight Paladin for a moment.


A stock wraithknight is a jump MC with two heavy wraithcanons.

this means the WK can move 12 inches a turn... so can the Knight, this means mobility wise it's a wash. which means neither the WK or KP can decisivly set the range.

the range on the wraithknights guns are 36 inches. the rapid fire battle canon on the KP is 72 inches. thus allowing the KP to open fire earlier and potentially play a range game.

the weapons stats are: RF: BC: AP 3 S8
Wraithtknight canons: AP:2 S:10

advantage to the wraithknight here, at least in theory. however the battlecanon is sufficant to ignore the wraithknights armor, whereas the knight still gets it's invulnerability save vs the wraithknight. over all I'd give a slight edge to the Knight Paladin here.


thing is, the wrightknight could put up a hell of a fight vs a Knight Paladin, but ultimatly that fight is going to be hugely dependant on setting the range. if the KP can eaither stay out of 36 inches, or close to melee range, the WK is dead.

Wait you're telling me a WK probably won't kill a Knight model? That's totally broken!!! It's not like an Imperial Knight costs 130 more points or anything right? Or you know the whole WK striking first in melee probably killing the Imperial Knight outright after getting a hull point or two off with shooting. Imperial knights are actually pretty accurately costed for their loadout, I'm actually terrified to think GW may have actually play-tested them before release.

Exactly.

People are already decrying them as broken, when they really arent. They just see the D in the chainsword statline and their brains shut off to everything else.

 Darkwater wrote:
Imperial knights are actually pretty accurately costed for their loadout, I'm actually terrified to think GW may have actually play-tested them before release.

This. Also, we have to bear in mind this is the first superheavy designed with 40k in mind, not an Apocalypse portover like most of the stuff in Escalation.

Let's compare the Knight to a Revenant, shall we?
You can get about 2.5 Knights for the cost of a Revenant. 5 Battle Cannon shots will cause, on average, 1 Hull Point of damage against the Revenant. If we assume Melta Cannon thing, we get about 3 Hull Points. (Assuming the Knights got within 18".)

The Revenant will, on average, kill 2 Knights per turn. (2 Hits with D weapons, 2D3+2 Hull Points gone.)

This same math can be applied to Warhounds, who will take about the same damage thanks to void shields.

Waaaghpower wrote:
Let's compare the Knight to a Revenant, shall we?
You can get about 2.5 Knights for the cost of a Revenant. 5 Battle Cannon shots will cause, on average, 1 Hull Point of damage against the Revenant. If we assume Melta Cannon thing, we get about 3 Hull Points. (Assuming the Knights got within 18".)

The Revenant will, on average, kill 2 Knights per turn. (2 Hits with D weapons, 2D3+2 Hull Points gone.)

This same math can be applied to Warhounds, who will take about the same damage thanks to void shields.

Its D3+1 by the way. And the knight isnt designed for taking out apocalypse level models (although it does do surprisingly well against stompas). It is a super heavy that has been purposely designed for a regular 40k game.

Not op like escalation Lord of Wars, but a good solid unit.

Waaaghpower put 2D3+2 because he calculated 2 D shots into each Knight. So he already factored that it was D3+1 for only 1D.

It would seem that 3 Knights have no chance at all against one Revenant though

No doubt GW will introduce similar mini-Titan type models for the other armies, in a few years.

Then we can all play sub-Escalation all the time.

 Imperator_Class wrote:
Not op like escalation Lord of Wars, but a good solid unit.

It's not that Escalation units are OP (most of them aren't). They are arbitrarily priced. They were not intended to be used in a standard game of 40k, and as a result their abilities don't translate well to point costs. In escalation you can find a Lord of Skulls, only marginally better than an Imperial Knight, for 888(!) points, besides a Trascendent C'tan (with Transliminal stride, Sky of falling stars and Wave of withering - that's enough to off a Knight in one turn) for 775 points, or the infamous Revenant for 900.

Well, sub-escalation describes the grey area the Imperial Knight has found a place in a FOC.

Its a well-priced model. Not over the top. The Revenant Titan will eventually kill two in one round of shooting.

What is interesting is that the Imperial Knight will shift the meta (in the tournament scene) a bit

 Agent_Tremolo wrote:
It's not that Escalation units are OP (most of them aren't). They are arbitrarily priced. They were not intended to be used in a standard game of 40k, and as a result their abilities don't translate well to point costs. In escalation you can find a Lord of Skulls, only marginally better than an Imperial Knight, for 888(!) points, besides a Trascendent C'tan (with Transliminal stride, Sky of falling stars and Wave of withering - that's enough to off a Knight in one turn) for 775 points, or the infamous Revenant for 900.

Exactly why I won't go near escalation. Until things are pointed correctly, Escalation units become either OP or UP because their points are off by several hundred. There is just no excuse. Hell even the Tras. C'tan is rather expensive looking next to the Revenant which has more firepower and considerably more durability for just 125 points more.

 Noir Eternal wrote:
Waaaghpower put 2D3+2 because he calculated 2 D shots into each Knight. So he already factored that it was D3+1 for only 1D.

It would seem that 3 Knights have no chance at all against one Revenant though

I doubt that 6 Knights could beat a single Revenant. I won't bother mathhammering it, but a back-of-the-envelope guess implies that a little decent movement on the Revenant player's behalf (To stay out of CC) and the Knights don't stand a chance.

I agree completely with Angel_Tremelo's sentiment. Titans are carelessly imbalanced unit never designed to be used in anything vaguely resembling tournament play.

I would extend that to even any casual play unless the your local group specifically wants those types of games.

How about a Knight vs CRASSUS ARMORED ASSAULT TRANSPORT decked out with 4 Lascannons?

And this is just a facetious question. Only ask out of personal information. I might pick one up as a super Land Raider for my IG.

That would be funny to take Knight, superheavy walker with D and say "nope, nope, you cant have your Baneblade"...

I would allow it, I wouldnt even think about not allowing it. Of course, you can say "nope, I wont play againts Revenant, its boring as hell" (and I will agree), but really, just idea saying "I dont like Lords of War...and now my Knights come to table" was really funny.

But under the line. I really like Escalation. I really dislike Revenant which seems to me as whole Eldar codex - awfully balanced with rest of crew. And most of all, it sucks that Knights have D weapons which mean that they wont be played much. Because best Lord of War units are without D weapons, they are fun to play with and against.

 Smokeydubbs wrote:
How about a Knight vs CRASSUS ARMORED ASSAULT TRANSPORT decked out with 4 Lascannons?

And this is just a facetious question. Only ask out of personal information. I might pick one up as a super Land Raider for my IG.

Well, lascannons are a threat to the Knight, but the Knight player should not be overly concerned about it.
It if places the Knight such that the lascannons are in one facing, the Knight will get a 4+ inv. save.
If a shot goes through, only a penetrating result of 5 (AP 2 give a +1 bonus) causes additional damage.

What ticked me off is a guy flat out tell me that if I ever bring a knight, he would take a shadow sword (despite him not even owning an imperial guard army) and saying its a lord of war choice until it gets a codex.

Is it just me, or does it seem a shadow sword and a knight are separate tiers?

 Tiger9gamer wrote:
What ticked me off is a guy flat out tell me that if I ever bring a knight, he would take a shadow sword (despite him not even owning an imperial guard army) and saying its a lord of war choice until it gets a codex.

Is it just me, or does it seem a shadow sword and a knight are separate tiers?

I'd say so, the Knight either has a 2 shot battle cannon or a melta with a very long range.


The Shadowsword has that horrible main gun.

Plus, isn't the Shadowsword in Apocalypse? Doesn't it say there that it is IG only?

 welshhoppo wrote:

 Tiger9gamer wrote:
What ticked me off is a guy flat out tell me that if I ever bring a knight, he would take a shadow sword (despite him not even owning an imperial guard army) and saying its a lord of war choice until it gets a codex.

Is it just me, or does it seem a shadow sword and a knight are separate tiers?

I'd say so, the Knight either has a 2 shot battle cannon or a melta with a very long range.


The Shadowsword has that horrible main gun.

Plus, isn't the Shadowsword in Apocalypse? Doesn't it say there that it is IG only?

Escalation, and exactly. He has DA and DE.