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.

 randomtoaster wrote:
I dunno, I think Orks could handle a Knight if played tactically, max out your elites with 2 full squads of lootas, potential of 90 S7 shots, depending on dice rolls, around 30-50% hit, then around half of them glancing. A few rounds of shooting could give a knight a bit of a headache.

Uh, that math assumes loaded dice AND luck at the same time.

45 lootaz are an average of 90 shots, 30 hits, 5 glances, 2.5 of those unsaved an a normal knight.

9 kannons are 4.5 hits, 1.5 pens and glances, 0.75 unsaved, plus 0,125 from potential "Explodes!" results.

To two turns of shooting with about 1000 points of orks.

Goresaw wrote:
Again. A knight, as in single. Yes. Maybe. And hopefully you'll have enough of an army left to handle the other 1500ish points of your opponent's army.

That's the problem with both nids and orks. Not that you CAN'T kill it, it's that if you want to kill it, you have to invest vastly too much effort in to it and will instead get beat down by the rest of the enemy army or any other Knights they might have.

Even if a Tyranid Skyblight formation might be able to deal with 1 Knight, it still can't deal with 3 Knights, lol.

Well I don't know about you but I have enough non super heavy models of eldar to play a 9000 point game. So with no super heavies to play with its a war again. No D weapons at 9k points. I personally would have over 250 models at that point level and would be using just about every model the eldar have to offer (minus shining spears. they are the only model I don't have any of yet, and a few of the special characters I don't have yet).

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 xttz wrote:
Gargoyles aren't allowed to charge the Knight unfortunately. You're not allowed to charge a target you can't hurt (under the vehicle rules). The smallest tarpit option here are 'stealers, at 14pts each.

Hmmm, never noticed that. It applies to walkers as well?

Yeah it's in the generic vehicle rules, so tanks, walkers and super-heavies are all covered. However MC's or other high toughness units aren't, so you can tarpit those as much as you like even if you can't wound them. Pretty silly and arbitrary tbh.

Oh, and please don't respond to Xerics. He's basically a bad troll at this point.

 Jidmah wrote:

 randomtoaster wrote:
I dunno, I think Orks could handle a Knight if played tactically, max out your elites with 2 full squads of lootas, potential of 90 S7 shots, depending on dice rolls, around 30-50% hit, then around half of them glancing. A few rounds of shooting could give a knight a bit of a headache.

Uh, that math assumes loaded dice AND luck at the same time.

45 lootaz are an average of 90 shots, 30 hits, 5 glances, 2.5 of those unsaved an a normal knight.

9 kannons are 4.5 hits, 1.5 pens and glances, 0.75 unsaved, plus 0,125 from potential "Explodes!" results.

To two turns of shooting with about 1000 points of orks.

And Lootas are prime targets for battle cannons. 45 Lootas are 675pts and I'm guessing the Knight could take out, what, 10 per turn, maybe more? 150+ points of dead lootas per turn.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xerics wrote:
Well I don't know about you but I have enough non super heavy models of eldar to play a 9000 point game.

....congratulations? I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. If I want to play a game with titans and hundreds of models, I'll play Epic.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 randomtoaster wrote:
I dunno, I think Orks could handle a Knight if played tactically, max out your elites with 2 full squads of lootas, potential of 90 S7 shots, depending on dice rolls, around 30-50% hit, then around half of them glancing. A few rounds of shooting could give a knight a bit of a headache.

Uh, that math assumes loaded dice AND luck at the same time.

45 lootaz are an average of 90 shots, 30 hits, 5 glances, 2.5 of those unsaved an a normal knight.

9 kannons are 4.5 hits, 1.5 pens and glances, 0.75 unsaved, plus 0,125 from potential "Explodes!" results.

To two turns of shooting with about 1000 points of orks.

And Lootas are prime targets for battle cannons. 45 Lootas are 675pts and I'm guessing the Knight could take out, what, 10 per turn, maybe more? 150+ points of dead lootas per turn.

Assuming the lootaz are not clumped and in some sort of area terrain/under a KFF, it's more like 5-7 dead per turn (10 hits when discounting scatter, wounding 8-9, 2-3 pass their cover save). Still, you point stands, since the enemy army isn't just the knight.

BRB FAQ states

Q: Can I charge an enemy unit that I can’t hurt? (p20)
A: Yes.


So I assume you can charge a knight even if you can't pen it.

And the Heavy Stubbers. 6 shots, 4 or so hits, 2 or so more kills.

What's the range on that thing? I assumed it to be out of range for shooting lootaz and instead shooting something else.

36" range. If the Lootas were in range you'd probably shoot them with it.

Goresaw wrote:
BRB FAQ states

Q: Can I charge an enemy unit that I can’t hurt? (p20)
A: Yes.


So I assume you can charge a knight even if you can't pen it.

That applies to non-vehicles, such as charging a T8 creature with a model that can only do S3 attacks.

The rules regarding vehicles are very clear:

BRB pg76 wrote:Charging a Vehicle
A unit can charge a vehicle in their Charge sub-phase. The charge move is conducted the same as charging other enemy units. However, a unit cannot charge a vehicle that it cannot hurt - it must have some possibility, no matter how small, of being able to inflict at least a glancing hit.

It's also a FAQ and not an errata, answering a general question rather than modifying a rule.

And the pyrovore goes nuclear when ID'd and shadows in the warp affects ALL enemy models, not just psykers.

Its all so badly written we just don't really know.

Goresaw wrote:
BRB FAQ states

Q: Can I charge an enemy unit that I can’t hurt? (p20)
A: Yes.


So I assume you can charge a knight even if you can't pen it.

This is a complicated question really.

That FAQ refers to the basic assault rules (p. 20)

ON P.76, the rules state that you cannot assault a vehicle you cannot hurt. Which is more specific and would then trump the general case.

That said the Walker rules state that Walkers assault and are assaulted like infantry, as in they roll charges and can be locked. This might mean that because they are assaulted like infantry (not vehicles) that you can assault them even if you cannot hurt them.

It is really a tough issue, that needs an FAQ.

Well, prepare for the Knight meta?

Start giving your sarges Power Fists so you can charge the Knight? Start taking Lascannons and Melta Guns again so you can combat it?

Refusing to play someone with these things is childish and stymies the game. I think the game is becoming *more* fun with all these new options because nobody can make just one super janky broken net-list and win ALL THE TIME. If the opponent shakes it up by bringing a big fortification or a Knight, all the more power to them!

Escalation does not belong in standard 40k. D weapons are far to powerful for this. While the knight would be fun in storyline base scenarios, as a general rule you should ask if it's ok to bring before playing with it.

OP's problem with the Tau player though just seems like the dude is a sore loser and likes his flavor of the month more than actual game play

drbored wrote:

Refusing to play someone with these things is childish and stymies the game.

You're painting with a very broad brush there, Dr. Bored, if you are in fact a REAL doctor!

I don't have a problem with the Imperial Knight, per say. I have a problem with Super Heavies in general in "normal" 40k games. IMHO, that dilutes what makes Apocalypse games special.

That, in fact, is the whole point of apocalypse. Throw down your big units! Play with an entire company or two of space marines! Drop down a 3x Warhound Titan Wolf Pack! Bring it on!

But in a normal game of 40k, I don't want to see it.

That's fine if you do. More power to you. You and I can still shake hands and go play someone else. I'm not going to call you childish for bringing the super heavy, and I expect the same consideration from you when I tell you that's not the type of game I want to play.

Cheers!

 kronk wrote:

drbored wrote:

Refusing to play someone with these things is childish and stymies the game.

You're painting with a very broad brush there, Dr. Bored, if you are in fact a REAL doctor!

I don't have a problem with the Imperial Knight, per say. I have a problem with Super Heavies in general in "normal" 40k games. IMHO, that dilutes what makes Apocalypse games special.

That, in fact, is the whole point of apocalypse. Throw down your big units! Play with an entire company or two of space marines! Drop down a 3x Warhound Titan Wolf Pack! Bring it on!

But in a normal game of 40k, I don't want to see it.

That's fine if you do. More power to you. You and I can still shake hands and go play someone else. I'm not going to call you childish for bringing the super heavy, and I expect the same consideration from you when I tell you that's not the type of game I want to play.

Cheers!

While I appreciate the cordiality, I stick by my opinion.

The Knight was, contrary to some beliefs, well designed. It takes a casual mindset, instead of this harsh black and white that people have developed.

I think we can start to accept this 'not-so-heavy-super-heavy' type of unit into the game. Riptides and Wraithknights already fit the bill with how survivable they are, for pete's sake!

In order to move forward, to accept some of these bigger things into the tournament scene, and, I hope, eventually to get Forgeworld and other things accepted so that each tournament isn't all about that One Netlist, we need to go ahead and accept the things GW is giving us for the game.

Otherwise, the game will rapidly split into those playing Everything in the game, and those playing the Core rulebook. I will bet you that those that accept the new things will have lots more fun than those that don't. They'll have broader collections, less spam, fancier conversions, and overall new ideas, while the unpleasant WAAC gamers will stick to core and their narrow-minded tournaments, trying to tweak every little point to be as spammy and monotonous as possible.

 azreal13 wrote:
I'm under no illusions that it's essentially all mine will ever be, but large models are my favorite to build and paint, so I'm ok with that.

If I get to give him a run out now and again to shake loose the (painstakingly applied by hand) rust and dirt, then I'll view it as a bonus.

Which, considering it is fundamentally a gaming piece, first and foremost, is a bit sad when you think about it.

Ha this is me all over, love my models too much to game with them.... and yes it's pretty pathetic. A knight will adorne my game room shelf some day soon..

Even more broad strokes.

I will bet you that people forced to play one way or the other will have less fun than people forcing other players to play their way!

I stick by my opinion. If you accept that not everyone wants what you want and are open minded enough to understand that some people prefer to play their own way, you'll find life to be less frustrating!

By all means play with super heavies in your own games. Just don't get your knickers in a twist when I tell you "No thanks!" As for creating a divide, we already had that for years with FW and Anti-FW, with pro/anti competitive mix

Now we have:
1. Pro FW, Pro Escalation, Pro Fluffy!
2. Pro FW, Anti Escalation, Pro Fluffy!
3. Anti FW, Pro Escalation, Pro Fluffy!
4. Anti FW, Anti Escalation, Pro Fluffy!
5. Pro FW, Pro Escalation, Pro Competitive!
6. Pro FW, Anti Escalation,Pro Competitive!
7. Anti FW, Pro Escalation,Pro Competitive!
8. Anti FW, Anti Escalation,Pro Competitive!

Yay!

drbored wrote:

 kronk wrote:

drbored wrote:

Refusing to play someone with these things is childish and stymies the game.

You're painting with a very broad brush there, Dr. Bored, if you are in fact a REAL doctor!

I don't have a problem with the Imperial Knight, per say. I have a problem with Super Heavies in general in "normal" 40k games. IMHO, that dilutes what makes Apocalypse games special.

That, in fact, is the whole point of apocalypse. Throw down your big units! Play with an entire company or two of space marines! Drop down a 3x Warhound Titan Wolf Pack! Bring it on!

But in a normal game of 40k, I don't want to see it.

That's fine if you do. More power to you. You and I can still shake hands and go play someone else. I'm not going to call you childish for bringing the super heavy, and I expect the same consideration from you when I tell you that's not the type of game I want to play.

Cheers!

While I appreciate the cordiality, I stick by my opinion.

The Knight was, contrary to some beliefs, well designed. It takes a casual mindset, instead of this harsh black and white that people have developed.

I think we can start to accept this 'not-so-heavy-super-heavy' type of unit into the game. Riptides and Wraithknights already fit the bill with how survivable they are, for pete's sake!

In order to move forward, to accept some of these bigger things into the tournament scene, and, I hope, eventually to get Forgeworld and other things accepted so that each tournament isn't all about that One Netlist, we need to go ahead and accept the things GW is giving us for the game.

Otherwise, the game will rapidly split into those playing Everything in the game, and those playing the Core rulebook. I will bet you that those that accept the new things will have lots more fun than those that don't. They'll have broader collections, less spam, fancier conversions, and overall new ideas, while the unpleasant WAAC gamers will stick to core and their narrow-minded tournaments, trying to tweak every little point to be as spammy and monotonous as possible.

I can say with certainty that you are 100% wrong on your last point. Tournaments will always be dominated by ONE list because the vast power difference in armies in this game. Codex to codex has so much swing without the addition or Escalation, Knights, and Forgeworld that just ADDING those things makes the gulf even larger. WAAC players aren't tied to anyone army and will switch as soon as the new OP shows up, so where do you get that they will be upset at a new army that can be composed of 5 super heavies?

I mean read through this topic alone and understand that three of the armies in this game will likely auto lose when faced with ONE Knight. You are arguing from an idealistic stand point and frankly not the reality for most armies. I play Tyranids, Chaos Space Marines, Chaos Daemons, Space Marines, and Sisters of Battle. I am currently selling my Eldar army that I have played with numerous times. I have had Necrons, Tau, Kroot Mercenaries, Grey Knights, and more that I am probably forgetting at the moment. I have a fair grasp on most of the armies in the game and can get a good idea of how a army runs if given time to look over the codex. Two of the five armies I currently play have no good way to deal with Knights, those being Tryanids and Chaos Daemons.

I am all for adding more options and expanding on what we consider an option for standard play, but to do so without consideration for how other armies will deal with it is insanity.

My dad plays Imperial Guard and has for ten years, has hundreds of models, and two super heavies. If he runs those super heavies against my Tyranids without me being able to build a list with them in mind chances are the game is going to be completely one sided. If I know he is bringing it, design my list to include enough MCs to actually take the fire for at least two turns then the game is much more interesting for both of us. That same list wont work against his more normal list that is MSU of Plasma/Melta vets.

Auto lose and auto wins shouldn't be apart of any game, sadly in 40k it is not just reality but the new norm and what GW as a company SHOOTS for. TAC is a thing of the past and NO, no one thinks that TAC means wins against everything, it means it has a CHANCE against everything.

 kronk wrote:
Even more broad strokes.

I will bet you that people forced to play one way or the other will have less fun than people forcing other players to play their way!

I stick by my opinion. If you accept that not everyone wants what you want and are open minded enough to understand that some people prefer to play their own way, you'll find life to be less frustrating!

By all means play with super heavies in your own games. Just don't get your knickers in a twist when I tell you "No thanks!" As for creating a divide, we already had that for years with FW and Anti-FW, with pro/anti competitive mix

Now we have:
1. Pro FW, Pro Escalation, Pro Fluffy!
2. Pro FW, Anti Escalation, Pro Fluffy!
3. Anti FW, Pro Escalation, Pro Fluffy!
4. Anti FW, Anti Escalation, Pro Fluffy!
5. Pro FW, Pro Escalation, Pro Competitive!
6. Pro FW, Anti Escalation,Pro Competitive!
7. Anti FW, Pro Escalation,Pro Competitive!
8. Anti FW, Anti Escalation,Pro Competitive!

Yay!

Agreeing to disagree is fine by me.

In the end, saying "I'm angry because they selfishly want to play the way they want to play" is the exact same thing as "I'm angry because they selfishly won't play the way I want them to play."

Never get mad at another player for trying to play the way they want. If anything, blame the system that creates these divides.

I'd rather blame Goresaw.

Who is with me!?!?

Easily solution - play lower points values where things are more balanced = less of a chance of things like fielding several Knights causing problems.

Of course you always get TFG who always wants to play 2,000 points or higher to use all their toys (and they tend to be the WAAC type as well), but most people seem to prefer playing lower points games anyways. In fact I think it's a shame that more leagues and campaigns and the like don't focus on the lower end of things, like 1250 or 1000 points.

 kronk wrote:
I'd rather blame Goresaw.

Who is with me!?!?

I agree, the bastard is an idiot.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

And Lootas are prime targets for battle cannons. 45 Lootas are 675pts and I'm guessing the Knight could take out, what, 10 per turn, maybe more? 150+ points of dead lootas per turn.

If they're not in cover and bunched up maybe. In cover, with half-decent spread, you can mitigate that hugely. With some spread and cover, 3-5 a turn may be more realistic. As an IG player who has lots of experience with battlecannons, they're very easily mitigated. If it's the melta Knight, you're even better off.

Meanwhile, dump a 30 man Boyz mob into it with a Klaw Nob, and that big scary D weapon's killing off a couple worthless Boyz a turn while the Nob puts a glancing hit or two on it each round and your ~230pt unit will single-handedly destroy that nearly 400pt Knight.

WayneTheGame wrote:
Easily solution - play lower points values where things are more balanced = less of a chance of things like fielding several Knights causing problems.

Of course you always get TFG who always wants to play 2,000 points or higher to use all their toys (and they tend to be the WAAC type as well), but most people seem to prefer playing lower points games anyways. In fact I think it's a shame that more leagues and campaigns and the like don't focus on the lower end of things, like 1250 or 1000 points.

Except when it doesn't. All it takes is one MC, one Landraider, one flyer. Something that requires a dedicated amount of resources to bring down but can't be fielded in a small points game without making a very unbalanced list unbalanced.

Small point games in my view have an even greater risk of turning into a rock/paper/scissors matchup because people don't have enough points to bring all the tools they need to deal with every threat. Yet those big things I mentioned often have all the tools to win by themself against a list that isn't specifically designed to kill it.

And what kind of logic leads you to saying that TFGs and WAAC players only want to play at big points so they can use as many models as they can. I would expect every player to want to play as large a game every so often just so they can use all their stuff at once

 Watchersinthedark wrote:
While the knight would be fun in storyline base scenarios, as a general rule you should ask if it's ok to bring before playing with it.

Not just Knight. Everything. I wont play against 2++ star and probably not Ripspam in casual games. But I would gladly play against Knight because its fun. And no, he isnt OP, but people needs to play with him first. And he belongs to WH40K. Fully.

 Madcat87 wrote:


Small point games in my view have an even greater risk of turning into a rock/paper/scissors matchup because people don't have enough points to bring all the tools they need to deal with every threat. Yet those big things I mentioned often have all the tools to win by themself against a list that isn't specifically designed to kill it.

Very true. IG can bring two vendettas and plenty of troops and armor at 1k points and under. What can Dark Eldar, Sisters, Dark Angels and even CSM bring that compares?

I play Dark Eldar and honestly have no idea on how to counter Knights. No cheap stuff to tarpit them with, no hope of blowing it up in one turn, no equivalent big monsters on my side.

Even my CSM will struggle. They get melta and cultist tarpits, but can't put out enough firepower to deal with knights and the other killy stuff in many imperial lists.

And also, is it me or is the accumulation of toys for Imperial players getting even more lop-sided? Between allying IG, getting Inquisitors, Knights, Stormtroopers, Tyrannic War veterans datasheet, Marines allying with themselves, Clan Raukaan, Legion of the Damned....there's really so much choice.

Meanwhile, Chaos gets Belakor (nice), Black Legion (meh) and Crimson Slaughter (seems decent), which is just plain lazy. And Dark Eldar get a big goose egg. Hell, they won't even release models for Vect or the Baron, let alone a data slate.

well me and my buddy Cleanse_and_Burn love this game and he recently got a land-raider redeemer and i love playing against it with my marines but hate it at the same time. just keep trying to convince them that its not OP