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.

 Gitsmasher wrote:
Then may I ask why are you playing this game if it is so poorly balanced? And if you aren't then why are you on the 40k board?

I play it because I have friends who play it (though most have now quit). I play it because I already have 40k armies to play with that I've spent hundreds if not thousands of hours on and I don't want to sell on ebay for a measly few hundred bucks. I play it because it's one of the easier games to find opponents. I play it because it's fun getting together with friends to play a game regardless of what the game might be. I play it because I like the 40k universe. I play it because no other sci-fi 28mm scale game has so many well expanded armies.

But I'd still think (as a game) it's pretty bad and I'd like to see it get better.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Gitsmasher wrote:
Then may I ask why are you playing this game if it is so poorly balanced? And if you aren't then why are you on the 40k board?

I play it because I have friends who play it (though most have now quit). I play it because I already have 40k armies to play with that I've spent hundreds if not thousands of hours on and I don't want to sell on ebay for a measly few hundred bucks. I play it because it's one of the easier games to find opponents. I play it because it's fun getting together with friends to play a game regardless of what the game might be. I play it because I like the 40k universe. I play it because no other sci-fi 28mm scale game has so many well expanded armies.

But I'd still think (as a game) it's pretty bad and I'd like to see it get better.

Not trying to sound rude or mean, but have you considered trying something else in life? It's obvious your not having fun, when you say things like "I have fun, but the game is bad" that's double speak, and a sign your trying to come up with any reason to continue playing.

Honestly bro I would recommend you put you models up and walk away from the hobby for a while, you may go out and find you like the rest of the world and may never come back, or you might comeback after a few years away, I know I have plenty of times.

 knas ser wrote:

 rednecroncryptek wrote:
What happened to people wanting a challenge? Actually wanting to play a game that requires more than placing the models down in deployment and then just rolling dice? I think perhaps the imperial knight may be good because it will perhaps make the Tau player adapt *gasp*.

Honestly, whether the concerns are right or wrong, I think you're doing many of the critics in this thread a disservice. Most aren't worried that Tau will be unable to deal with the IKs, but that it will be even more of a step back for all the non-Tau/Taudar. It's not people mostly complaining because they don't like a challenge but because they fear that the IKs make the game even more uneven and thus less of a challenge still (due to unequal sides making the game less about skill and more about army choice).

I mean obviously there are others out there how you describe as this thread was kicked off by someone facing exactly that sort of player. But I think most of the people in this thread are not like that.

I personally haven't made a judgement on this. It seems powerful for its points, but I haven't seen it in action or read enough battle reports, yet. It's 375 points, yes? For that I could load a Wave Serpent up wit six wraith guard with D-Scythes. Or have six D-Cannon Support Batteries and have change for a warlock or two, I think. Actually, with a quick bit of head-arithmetic, that's about thirty guardians with three bright lance weapons platforms or about eight Reapers plus Exarch, plus fast-shot and starshot missiles for all. Is a single IK over-powered compared to those options? Honestly, it seems a bit too good, but for me it's too early to tell.

We had this fuss over the Revenant Titan as well. But there the model costs the same as a small country so you don't see it very often, and it's also non-scoring and over twice the points. So I'm going to give it a little time to tell.

This exactly. I'll play against the IK a few times and if its okay, I'll continue to play against them. If they're OP, then I won't play against them. My SOB army shouldn't have a problem, but my SM army certainly will. I don't see how my SM army could even hope to take out two.

Funny thing is I see the opposite I see it making those lists stronger because they can just bring a knight of their own......or can already kill a knight. The armies that it hurts most are daemons, nids, and orks. Which now need to account for another threat so weaknt he selves agains those spam lists....

I think a lot of armies lacking anti-armor will be hit.

It's a big point sink to try and "fight fire with fire" as tau/eldar against imperial forces. You're going against armies which can field stronger anti-armor wings than you, can directly support them with tech marines and such and score too.

If a taudar player wants to spend the points to field one as an allied detachment, he can go for it. But I think the majority response in a competitive game will be "Great".

They're not as hard to kill as a riptide if you're fielding an army that has good anti-armor. And if taudar players do start to field them as allies, you'll start to see anti-armor wings as a standard inclusion in a competitive list until eventually we do have some balance in the lists. I personally, would love to go against a wave serpent / IK army as an imperial army or my necrons.

I can field stormteks with haywire staves and anrakyr the traveler which are units I haven't considered fielding as a standard until now. And if I'm imperial forces, I can directly support my IK with tech marines. I haven't looked incredibly deep at it yet, but I foresee spammed lists on the tau/eldar side becoming very hard to field if your opponent is using a knight with support and we'll probably see more variation on both sides as a result.

So, yeah.

TL;DR: "I'll use an IK to beat your IK" as tau, eldar, ect won't work.

I don't think the new Tyranid Skyblight list are going to have too much trouble with them.

 Gitsmasher wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Gitsmasher wrote:
Then may I ask why are you playing this game if it is so poorly balanced? And if you aren't then why are you on the 40k board?

I play it because I have friends who play it (though most have now quit). I play it because I already have 40k armies to play with that I've spent hundreds if not thousands of hours on and I don't want to sell on ebay for a measly few hundred bucks. I play it because it's one of the easier games to find opponents. I play it because it's fun getting together with friends to play a game regardless of what the game might be. I play it because I like the 40k universe. I play it because no other sci-fi 28mm scale game has so many well expanded armies.

But I'd still think (as a game) it's pretty bad and I'd like to see it get better.

Not trying to sound rude or mean, but have you considered trying something else in life? It's obvious your not having fun, when you say things like "I have fun, but the game is bad" that's double speak, and a sign your trying to come up with any reason to continue playing.

Honestly bro I would recommend you put you models up and walk away from the hobby for a while, you may go out and find you like the rest of the world and may never come back, or you might comeback after a few years away, I know I have plenty of times.

It's not double speak. I enjoy the social aspect of getting together with friends and playing a wargame. I also enjoy reading the fluff and building an army. And while I think the game is pretty average, I do still enjoy the competitive aspect of wargaming (opposed to just placing action figures down and yelling "pew pew pew").

The hobby is multifaceted. 40k has a big bird poo on a couple of faces, but that doesn't mean I don't enjoy the other faces.

There's more to the game beyond it's (flawed) rules. I actually think Fantasy is a better game yet I have more 40k armies because I there's more 40k armies I think are cool.

EDIT: Also, I've been in and out of the hobby for around the past 20 years, so you don't need to feel like the wise old man telling me to walk away from the models and see the world... been there, done that, I didn't touch the hobby for 4 years through college and another 2 years when I was living overseas for work

sure go ahead and field them,,,the new kits are amazing ,,,but I would swap up my list if facing something with d weapons with a shadowsword,,,,,lol

Alright I was wrong about the 90 degree arc thing, with that in mind Tyranids have no answer to a Knight short of sacrificing well over its points in models to kill it.

So yeah, let's dig at the meat of the problem. A TAC list now needs so many different things that it is impossible to actually build a TAC list anymore, you need so many answers to so many different possible threats. Some armies can get away with it because they are generalist, some armies just have to accept that there are certain things they can't answer. This is terrible game design and is why most everyone I know doesn't even attempt to play 40k competitively anymore.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
It's not double speak. I enjoy the social aspect of getting together with friends and playing a wargame. I also enjoy reading the fluff and building an army. And while I think the game is pretty average, I do still enjoy the competitive aspect of wargaming (opposed to just placing action figures down and yelling "pew pew pew").

The hobby is multifaceted. 40k has a big bird poo on a couple of faces, but that doesn't mean I don't enjoy the other faces.

There's more to the game beyond it's (flawed) rules. I actually think Fantasy is a better game yet I have more 40k armies because I there's more 40k armies I think are cool.

EDIT: Also, I've been in and out of the hobby for around the past 20 years, so you don't need to feel like the wise old man telling me to walk away from the models and see the world... been there, done that, I didn't touch the hobby for 4 years through college and another 2 years when I was living overseas for work

Have an exalt!

I'm not your age, but I agree with you there's a lot to enjoy about 40k other than the game itself. I played my first game of regular ol' 40k this year just a week ago. Hadn't actually brought an army to play with since November to my FLGS even though we have had regular people show up every Thursday since the location opened August 2012. I just bring my paint tray and whatever figures I'm working on, hang, talk to people, laugh, enjoy the camaraderie.

40k isn't necessarily a "bad game" but only if you go out of your way to tweak the experience to be enjoyable for both people. Right now I'm a bit obsessed with Kill Team because we've been having a lot of fun with that and it's also gotten a few new people into the hobby.

It's kind of frustrating Dakka's attitude overall seems to be "bring the most hyper competitive army you can or GTFO scrub" because it's alienating behavior.

 rednecroncryptek wrote:
I'm starting to get the feeling that people are becoming too whiny for their own good, I myself would love the challenge to be able to play an IK, but with my LGS closing down soon i fear i may not get the chance.

What happened to people wanting a challenge? Actually wanting to play a game that requires more than placing the models down in deployment and then just rolling dice? I think perhaps the imperial knight may be good because it will perhaps make the Tau player adapt *gasp*.

All in all I think that's a silly way to play. I play necrons and never once have fielded a unit of wraiths and the maximum Night Scythes I have fielded is 2, I prefer to play balanced lists or at least lists based on synergy and I believe that the IK, without seeing the rules, is an anti-one trick pony. Plus, I personally would love to see the spectacle of two IK engaged in CC. Fully painted, with a sprawling battle at their feet, and then they all blow up and take the entire game out. That would be a game indeed.

Maybe these players will finally realise that tactics may or may not be crucial to the game now. Perhaps the SPAM days are over? I dont really know, but I think the OP needs to find 'better' players.

Nah. The issue is that a lot of "competitive" players aren't actually interested in a competition, they're interested in playing out their pre-calculated scenarios on the tabletop in which they lose in a statistically insignificant number of circumstances. That's why they perpetually bleat about Forgeworld despite the fact that 90% of their stuff is overcosted, 9% is about right, and maybe 1% is actually undercosted or OP; their calculations can't account for that 1%, and they despise that because they want to win the game when they build the list.

 Gitsmasher wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Gitsmasher wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

True. Its still their choice and you can't take that choice away from them, however petty you may think their reasoning to be. This is why its important to have a well written, well balanced game. If it was balanced, fewer people would be so upset and feel that certain armies are unfair and overpowered.

This really is GW's fault for writing a pile of crap, not the customers who complain about the pile of crap.

If I want balanced ill play chess.

You may want to consider playing that game if balance is what you care about most.

Why do you bother playing with a ruleset at all then? Why not just make it up on the spot and go "pew pew pew ! you die!" instead of rolling dice and following rules. Rules give structure to a game. If those rules are poorly written and unbalanced, then its a poor game.

Then may I ask why are you playing this game if it is so poorly balanced? And if you aren't then why are you on the 40k board?

Because I began playing the game in an Edition (5th) when balance wasn't nearly as bad as it is now. There was no "Taudar", "Triptide" or "Triple Helldrake" lists when I began playing. Balance has gone downhill since I began, and since 6th especially.

And above all, I play the game because I was interested in the Lore, especially that of Raven Guard.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

Because I began playing the game in an Edition (5th) when balance wasn't nearly as bad as it is now. There was no "Taudar", "Triptide" or "Triple Helldrake" lists when I began playing. Balance has gone downhill since I began, and since 6th especially.

And above all, I play the game because I was interested in the Lore, especially that of Raven Guard.

Wow, how selective our memories have become. 6th has had far fewer months of one list dominating than any edition ever. Are our memories of Longfang Razor spam, DE msu lists, anything GK, and Necrons really that poor? 6th is fairly well balanced on a year to year scale. As long as dumb crap like house ruling IK away and stuff like that doesn't get crazy, then we'll balance out fine.

Believe me TauDar and even more so, SeerStar are broken. But I think with reasonable GT like restrictions it can be fun for all. Hopefully the new 6.5 codex rewrites Str D weapons and removes Battle Brothers completely and does something about 2++ rerolls (I really liked the LVO approach).
Minor tweaks = good fun for all
Knee jerk banning = neckbeard turf protection

sonicaucie wrote:

Funny thing is I see the opposite I see it making those lists stronger because they can just bring a knight of their own......or can already kill a knight. The armies that it hurts most are daemons, nids, and orks. Which now need to account for another threat so weaknt he selves agains those spam lists....

I think a lot of armies lacking anti-armor will be hit.

It's a big point sink to try and "fight fire with fire" as tau/eldar against imperial forces. You're going against armies which can field stronger anti-armor wings than you, can directly support them with tech marines and such and score too.

If a taudar player wants to spend the points to field one as an allied detachment, he can go for it. But I think the majority response in a competitive game will be "Great".

They're not as hard to kill as a riptide if you're fielding an army that has good anti-armor. And if taudar players do start to field them as allies, you'll start to see anti-armor wings as a standard inclusion in a competitive list until eventually we do have some balance in the lists. I personally, would love to go against a wave serpent / IK army as an imperial army or my necrons.

I can field stormteks with haywire staves and anrakyr the traveler which are units I haven't considered fielding as a standard until now. And if I'm imperial forces, I can directly support my IK with tech marines. I haven't looked incredibly deep at it yet, but I foresee spammed lists on the tau/eldar side becoming very hard to field if your opponent is using a knight with support and we'll probably see more variation on both sides as a result.

So, yeah.

TL;DR: "I'll use an IK to beat your IK" as tau, eldar, ect won't work.

I just happen to disagree and I see it more as those armies hard counter to assault armies which are screwed often enough as it is. Right now my Daemon army can kill wave serpents by catching them and killing them in the assault...but if there is a knight waiting for me doing so becomes super risky....they are no easier to kill than a riptide for just about anything in the game, except gauss and haywire, but they are much more durable against anything specific to anti infantry. Anrakyr does so little he is not worth taking against knights...they don't shoot that well so taking one and shooting with it is not big deal.

My entire point is that some armies answer to Anti armor is not shooting...and those armies get screwed by an Imperial Knight.

SO I think we end up with a meta of stuff + knights and the armies that can counter them ok (which when they are supported by other things are really not that many armies.)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Yodhrin wrote:

 rednecroncryptek wrote:
I'm starting to get the feeling that people are becoming too whiny for their own good, I myself would love the challenge to be able to play an IK, but with my LGS closing down soon i fear i may not get the chance.

What happened to people wanting a challenge? Actually wanting to play a game that requires more than placing the models down in deployment and then just rolling dice? I think perhaps the imperial knight may be good because it will perhaps make the Tau player adapt *gasp*.

All in all I think that's a silly way to play. I play necrons and never once have fielded a unit of wraiths and the maximum Night Scythes I have fielded is 2, I prefer to play balanced lists or at least lists based on synergy and I believe that the IK, without seeing the rules, is an anti-one trick pony. Plus, I personally would love to see the spectacle of two IK engaged in CC. Fully painted, with a sprawling battle at their feet, and then they all blow up and take the entire game out. That would be a game indeed.

Maybe these players will finally realise that tactics may or may not be crucial to the game now. Perhaps the SPAM days are over? I dont really know, but I think the OP needs to find 'better' players.

Nah. The issue is that a lot of "competitive" players aren't actually interested in a competition, they're interested in playing out their pre-calculated scenarios on the tabletop in which they lose in a statistically insignificant number of circumstances. That's why they perpetually bleat about Forgeworld despite the fact that 90% of their stuff is overcosted, 9% is about right, and maybe 1% is actually undercosted or OP; their calculations can't account for that 1%, and they despise that because they want to win the game when they build the list.

Not really true at all its because a vast majority of them don't want to face stuff like Thudd guns under a skyshield (hobby killer) lists which oh by the way could now field a knight for assault protection...because we all enjoy setting up models and then removing them from the table. I really wish GW put out balanced rules for stuff....but they don't and the inclusion of a good amount of it (FW, Superheavies, and regular rules) leads to onesided games. Knights just add to that.

Arbiter_Shade wrote:
Alright I was wrong about the 90 degree arc thing, with that in mind Tyranids have no answer to a Knight short of sacrificing well over its points in models to kill it.

So yeah, let's dig at the meat of the problem. A TAC list now needs so many different things that it is impossible to actually build a TAC list anymore, you need so many answers to so many different possible threats. Some armies can get away with it because they are generalist, some armies just have to accept that there are certain things they can't answer. This is terrible game design and is why most everyone I know doesn't even attempt to play 40k competitively anymore.

This. This right here is the problem.

I would have absolutely no problem playing against any number of Knights with my Eldar. That codex has a number of options that are either good at inflicting ranged damage, very mobile, or more often, both. I can put Bright Lances on nearly anything, often cheaply. I can plink away getting glances with umpteen scatter lasers, or snipe away with Heavy Wraithcannons from while staying well outside charge range. And if all that fails, I can even throw in some allies with even more options.
More importantly, many of these options will find their way into regular lists, and aren't specially chosen just because a Knight is on the table.

On the other hand you'd be lucky to get more than a single game from me with Knights against my Tyranids. Despite the sizeable (over 10k points) collection I own, there is very little I can use to counter Knights point for point. I have no desire to drop £150+ on multiple FMCs to run the latest FotM netlist (and I don't like FMCs in general anyway). Outside of Escalation/Apoc, my best ranged S10 option is a pitiful 2-shot AP4 gun fired at BS3. Zoanthropes can no longer deep strike into position with their short-ranged lance attack, so that using them means relying on my opponent feeling magnanimous enough to wander into range (and not pointing the invuln in their direction too). I can hope to get lucky with Hive Guard shooting, but this means tailoring my list specifically against Knights and sacrificing other Elite slots my army usually relies on. A TAC build is certainly not an option if you didn't rush out and buy multiple boxes of the new Crone kit.
Of course, normally I wouldn't worry about any of this. In a typical game I don't concern myself with shooting down AV13/14 because I can just throw some MCs in that direction and watch them explode. I often thank my opponent for running Land Raiders, because they're like big juicy pinatas for my bugs that I have no trouble smashing up.
But with Knights that's different. Not only can they outmaneuver most MCs and dictate range with a 12" movement, not only do they have a Destroyer melee weapon that can kill MCs at I4 before many of them strike, but even if you do kill the thing it explodes and hits everything in base contact with another Destroyer hit. That makes virtually any attempt to take out Knights in melee a suicide run. Even the melee focused, 500pt+/£100 Scythed Hierodule is unlikely to survive an encounter with a single Knight. The only reliable hard counter comes in the form of a ~750pt/£250 Harridan - twice the cost of a Knight in both money and points. Better hope that doesn't fail a single grounding test!

Some armies just don't have reasonable options to counter these things (I feel just as bad for Ork players), and I don't blame any player who declines a game with Knights when they don't have the tools to compete.

Arbiter_Shade wrote:
So yeah, let's dig at the meat of the problem. A TAC list now needs so many different things that it is impossible to actually build a TAC list anymore, you need so many answers to so many different possible threats. Some armies can get away with it because they are generalist, some armies just have to accept that there are certain things they can't answer. This is terrible game design and is why most everyone I know doesn't even attempt to play 40k competitively anymore.

As I posted in this thread, this is by design according to Jervis Johnson. He specifically says that "[The fact GW is satisfied with the IK] is because no one army can ever deal with all-comers. The holy grail of many hobbyists is to fashion a single, all-conquering army that can win in any eventuality, but in truth there is probably no such thing. It doesn't make the search any less fun, but there are just too many variables, and the Imperial Knight adds another wrinkle to it."

GW thinks there shouldn't be a "TAC list" and the myriad of options available now are a good thing because of that.

(Note: Please feel free to bring to the discussion linked above, I wanted to quote it to cite but I don't want to derail this thread)

Yes, but there are armies that can make TAC lists and other armies that can't, as explained in xttz's post one above.

In my view it should be possible for any codex to have several lists with differe flavours that have a reasonable chance against any opposition given good tactics and a bit of luck.

Otherwise why bother to play?

Arbiter_Shade wrote:
So yeah, let's dig at the meat of the problem. A TAC list now needs so many different things that it is impossible to actually build a TAC list anymore, you need so many answers to so many different possible threats. Some armies can get away with it because they are generalist, some armies just have to accept that there are certain things they can't answer. This is terrible game design and is why most everyone I know doesn't even attempt to play 40k competitively anymore.

That sounds right, and you can see it with the new Skyblight formation for Tyranids - I just can't build a TAC that will have a chance against mass flyers AND be able to counter a couple Knights AND be able to deal Triptides AND be able to defeat a horde of boyz. It's not really an issue when I'm playing against my regular opponents (since we build lists with each other's army in mind), but I've played quite a few pick-up games that were just boring because my usual TAC list was totally ineffective against these new shiny units that GW pushes out.

WayneTheGame wrote:
As I posted in this thread, this is by design according to Jervis Johnson. He specifically says that "[The fact GW is satisfied with the IK] is because no one army can ever deal with all-comers. The holy grail of many hobbyists is to fashion a single, all-conquering army that can win in any eventuality, but in truth there is probably no such thing. It doesn't make the search any less fun, but there are just too many variables, and the Imperial Knight adds another wrinkle to it."

GW thinks there shouldn't be a "TAC list" and the myriad of options available now are a good thing because of that.

(Note: Please feel free to bring to the discussion linked above, I wanted to quote it to cite but I don't want to derail this thread)

If I was a GW game designer with free access to all the models, I might dig that philosophy. But I have only finite time and money to spend on models, and I play TAC out of necessity. I resent being pushed out of the hobby because I don't want to spend another few hundred bucks on models that can counter the latest GW releases. When I see the Knight, I don't think "wow, that looks cool!" I think "damnit, now I'm just going to get stomped every game unless I buy some overpriced new models".

 TedNugent wrote:
This thing is a disaster for Orks.

At least it's coming over to fight us in close combat, unlike those eldar and tau cheapskates

A brood of 3 fex should cost equal or less than a knight and kill it more often than not - and have a model left at the end.

Assuming the Knight is not in terrain, and the explosion does not hit the 3rd carnifex.

Also there is a not unreasonable chance that it will kill 2 before they swing...At which poin they don't kill it.

I really don't understand the fuss over this unit. Of course that might just be because I have a hard time fearing any model that can be crippled by a 60 point unit of haywire wyches.

Also, with my daemons, I look forward to using puppet master on the big bastard.

I've found with 40k, best not to focus on what you can't do, but what you can do. And if you can't do anything about something....CHANGE or accept it!

People keep saying puppet master...it is not that good, it does not shoot that much...so meh...I can already puppet master things far more dangerous.

Also sure 60 points of haywire wyches could kill it...it is likely though that they will not.

It might kill some in overwatch (assuming they get there in the first place) Then they only hit with 3ish grenades, which might get you 3 glances...Then all the wyches die. Sure they could roll all 6s for pens etc....but it is not likely.

Massaen wrote:A brood of 3 fex should cost equal or less than a knight and kill it more often than not - and have a model left at the end.

Breng77 wrote:Assuming the Knight is not in terrain, and the explosion does not hit the 3rd carnifex.

Also there is a not unreasonable chance that it will kill 2 before they swing...At which poin they don't kill it.

The Knight will nearly always strike first (I4 vs I2) and hit on 3+ (WS4 vs WS3). This typically means landing 2-3 destroyer hits, each of which will inflict a minimum of 2 wounds on 2+. With luck it's possible for all 3 Fexes to go down without striking a blow, but 1 or 2 is fairly likely.
Any survivors get to strike back needing 4+ to hit, so they'd better be melee fit for the extra attack. With only AP2, a Fex would have to be pretty lucky to get any Explode results, but has a good chance to remove 1 or 2 HP.

Of course this is all reliant on various assumptions, such as:

The Knight is using his 12" movement to dictate range over the 6" moving Fexes, ensuring he gets the charge and therefore the extra benefits from HoW

No HoW hits were factored in here from either side

The Carnifex brood makes it into combat undamaged, which is pretty unlikely when the Paladin battle cannon is more than capable of killing a whole Fex in a turn.

The only real chance a Fex brood has of killing a Knight is to get the charge off themselves, and pile on 3D3 S9 HoW hits first. That needs to be followed up by 1, preferably 2 of them striking normally. Unfortunately there's not much chance of that against any competent Knight player.

A better melee option would be a dedicated Flyrant with Crushing Claws and Scything Talons. This strikes before the Knight with a much better WS, and can keep pace thanks to the 12" jump move. Unfortunately it's still pretty unlikely to kill an undamaged Knight before getting hit back, and can't weather more than a single Destroyer hit including the explosion. All of this means a 200pt+ synapse unit (and likely your Warlord) is still a suicide option.

Breng77 wrote:
People keep saying puppet master...it is not that good, it does not shoot that much...so meh...I can already puppet master things far more dangerous.

Also sure 60 points of haywire wyches could kill it...it is likely though that they will not.

It might kill some in overwatch (assuming they get there in the first place) Then they only hit with 3ish grenades, which might get you 3 glances...Then all the wyches die. Sure they could roll all 6s for pens etc....but it is not likely.

Puppet master is useful in this instance in that the enemies units are not usually placed to get cover/show front arc to one of their own units.

And with the wyches I did say cripple not kill. I would recommend shaving a hullpoint or three off with lances first. But the fact remains that after 1 thrown grenade and assuming that the heavy stubber doesnt kill any wyches, you are looking at 4 grenade hits. Even if you haven't done anything else before that, the knight is now easy pickings.

As to regarding whether or not they make it there, if IKs become a common thing, I will be adding a 2nd unit of these girls to my list. All in all I'd rather see an IK then like points of Riptides.

 gardeth wrote:

I've found with 40k, best not to focus on what you can't do, but what you can do. And if you can't do anything about something....CHANGE or accept it!

This. If the game remained the same for its entire life, it would grow boring and stale after a few short years. The game will change in an attempt to change the meta. Don't you guys want something to take out Taudar, seerstar, and beaststar? I'm sure any army barring nids, daemons, orks can handle at least one by itself. And don't forget that the cost of the Knight goes against the point limit for their army. Spend a turn using the resources at your disposal to remove it as a threat and laugh as the rest of his army can't compete. If you build your list right with overlapping tasks, you can do it. The only problem I could see is a TAC list vs 4-6 knights. I have no answer for that other than praying for a lucky scatter on the d explosion template.

I really like the ideal of the imperial knight, I've only just come back to 40k and had my ass complexly handed to me tau...which is demoralising. Two riptides jumping across the battlefield blowing all my guard up. I didn't have much of an answer to them in my current force but I'm not going to not play that guy cos he will beat me, I'm just going to have to think hard about how to beat him....and I will one day.

Would be be very mean to field a Baneblande (as I've just ordered one) and an Imperial Knight (as I really want one) in an 1850 point game.....hehe

Our group is planning on using them.

 randomtoaster wrote:
So in no uncertain terms, i've been told by many players in my local club, they'll refuse to play me if I bring my Knight titan. Played this Tau guy, play him most weeks and generally he'll win (general camping Tau tactics, smart missiles, marker lights, riptides etc.) this time I tore him apart with my Storm Raven/IK combo, now hes saying he won't play me again. Now everytime I get tabled by him (it's not hard when i'm running a 12 model list...) I don't moan, I just take it in my stride, I don't care it's all fun. However, since he played something he didn't know how to deal with right away, he's gonna refuse any games from now on.
This other guy too, who brings stuff from stronghold assault without even asking his opponent (i know its part of 40k now, but its common courtesy) says he won't play me either. Yet, he is one of the most try hard WAAC players, he's the most irritant person to play against, however he's a challenge.

I can understand the worry of coming up against a super heavy with D strength weapons, but really it's not invincible in the slightest. You won't know how to take it down, unless you've come across one. Has anyone else had this problem so far?

Throw it right back at them. "I'll not play against stronghold assault anymore."

I'm rather puzzled by the fear of the Knight's resilience, if you could deal with a standard Leman Russ tank in cover in 5E, you can probably deal with a Knight even easier, especially if you catch if from the sides. The only thing scary about it is its melee weapon, and only if you're tossing something at it that wouldn't get instagibbed by an S10 melee hit anyway. For most tanks and infantry units, the difference between D and S10 AP2/1 in melee is academic, it's other walkers, MC's, and stuff reliant on invul saves that really cares.

For nearly 400pts, I'm not really seeing where anyone has much of a stance to refuse to play them on balance issues.

Arbiter_Shade wrote:
Alright I was wrong about the 90 degree arc thing, with that in mind Tyranids have no answer to a Knight short of sacrificing well over its points in models to kill it.

So yeah, let's dig at the meat of the problem. A TAC list now needs so many different things that it is impossible to actually build a TAC list anymore, you need so many answers to so many different possible threats. Some armies can get away with it because they are generalist, some armies just have to accept that there are certain things they can't answer. This is terrible game design and is why most everyone I know doesn't even attempt to play 40k competitively anymore.

Hive Guard with Electroshock will kill it in 2-3 rounds of shooting pretty easily.
Zoanthrope Brood of 3 can single round it, but more likely kill it in 2 rounds.

Other less friendly options are MCs Smashing it. Your sacrificing your MC, but pointwise should come out ahead.