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.

Not fun for the same reasons that its not fun to play against armored company lists (which is probably why GW never made them officially okay to use..)+1.

Some armies just do not have the a lot of AT options, and when your opponents army has options to kill all of your stuff, and your army has very few models which can attempt to hurt theirs the game is not fun.

Also playing against an army that may have only 1-2 different types of models, is pretty boring.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 OzTeG8ndPwRfl wrote:

 BrotherHaraldus wrote:
Stomp attacks wound nobz on a 2+

Stomp attack was described earlier to me as a S6 AP4 Blast template two thirds of the time. S6 on T5 of a Nob biker bounds on a 3+. But that information is dependent on that guy giving me the correct info, for all I know he lied.

on some number = no effect
on some other numbers = S6ap4 blast
on some number= you remove the models stomped from play.

I think playing against Knights would be fun in the same way it was fun to occasionally just line up every big model you own and try and take them down with the small ones.

That is, fun once or twice for a laugh, not so fun in the long run or in a standard game.

I think the army that would love to face a Knight army the most would be a Gauss heavy Necron Army. Probably with Imotek so you can call down the lightning on them too.

The close second would either be a Grav-Centurians heavy Marine army.

Everyone else would be hit or miss based on what you bring.

I almost think if you're facing a Knight Army you should get a roll on the Lords of War Warlord Traits table and possibly even be using those rules just because you're facing super heavies.

The only way I could cope against more than one is list tailoring with either of my two armies and my HH army would have to be a two force org list to pull it off with the models I have and even that would be concentrating fire on just them and ignoring the rest of the army. I dont have the models available to my DE currently to list tailor enough to beat more than one.

I cant figure out what GW was thinking besides money by making them anything but Lord of War choices. So no I do not think they are fun.

 OzTeG8ndPwRfl wrote:

 BrotherHaraldus wrote:
Stomp attacks wound nobz on a 2+

Stomp attack was described earlier to me as a S6 AP4 Blast template two thirds of the time. S6 on T5 of a Nob biker bounds on a 3+. But that information is dependent on that guy giving me the correct info, for all I know he lied.

2-5 Stomp wounds on 3+ and you'd get an invulnerable save plus a FNP save

1 stomp result misses

6 stomp result removes everything under the template. With D3 templates this is the real concern, but this occurs at I1 step, which means you get to swing with the klaws if you make it that far. That's an average of 2 templates placed essentially wherever the Knight wants. With a 6+ per template and 2 templates, that means a ~30% that he can place a "remove all" 3" blast template at the I1 step.

Suffice to say that's a 70% chance you can survive the I1 step. If you destroy it, then you get the blast template. It's a real question, suffice to say it is possible that they could win with minimal casualties (depending on the explosion scatter), equally likely that they could all get wiped out in horrible carnage.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I think the army that would love to face a Knight army the most would be a Gauss heavy Necron Army. Probably with Imotek so you can call down the lightning on them too.

The close second would either be a Grav-Centurians heavy Marine army.

Everyone else would be hit or miss based on what you bring.

I almost think if you're facing a Knight Army you should get a roll on the Lords of War Warlord Traits table and possibly even be using those rules just because you're facing super heavies.

My friend ran his bug army in a Blue table report against 5 Knights and won. The stealers were getting a lot of rends and his Carnifexes were getting some good hammer of wrath rolls.

Relapse wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I think the army that would love to face a Knight army the most would be a Gauss heavy Necron Army. Probably with Imotek so you can call down the lightning on them too.

The close second would either be a Grav-Centurians heavy Marine army.

Everyone else would be hit or miss based on what you bring.

I almost think if you're facing a Knight Army you should get a roll on the Lords of War Warlord Traits table and possibly even be using those rules just because you're facing super heavies.

My friend ran his bug army in a Blue table report against 5 Knights and won. The stealers were getting a lot of rends and his Carnifexes were getting some good hammer of wrath rolls.

If you're managing to charge with 2+ Carnies then you have a chance, however if you're managing to charge with several Carnies I can't help but feel your opponent isn't doing his/her job right.

If you get lucky with stealers then that helps, but you have to get lucky. On average it takes 27 attacks to do 1 HP of damage with rending stealers, given stealers only have 2 attacks, cost 14pts each and die in droves to stomp attacks, I don't see how you're going to get far without a lot of luck.

It also wouldn't be a standard TAC competitive list with the hordes of stealers you need to dent a Knight.

Hordes of stealers..... so many juicy shooting targets

At the end of the day, if I wanted to play Adeptus Titanicus I would play Battletech because it's a better game of giant robots.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
At the end of the day, if I wanted to play Adeptus Titanicus I would play Battletech because it's a better game of giant robots.

Given how crappy Battletech is, that's quite an indictment.

At least both sides get to play with a lot of giant robots that have variable capabilities and tactics.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
At the end of the day, if I wanted to play Adeptus Titanicus I would play Battletech because it's a better game of giant robots.

That's another thing, IMO 40k should stick to what 40k is good at and make different rule sets for big games and small games if it wants to do that. 40k rules (not talking about army balance and all that jazz, just the core rules) are best for games of ~50 models per side, around 1000-2000pts. If they want to introduce big walkers and superheavies, IMO they should just make a set of rules that is more appropriate for it. D weapons are a poor attempt to fit things more powerful than S10 in to a standard 40k game, as are the superheavy rules are similarly a poor attempt to fit bigger vehicles in.

Likewise you often hear people say that if you only play smaller games, the 40k balance is a lot better... however if you want to play smaller games there are better rule options out there. IMO 40k should stick to what 40k does which is slightly-larger-than-skirmish-games or else just rewrite the rules to be more suited to big stuff.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I think the army that would love to face a Knight army the most would be a Gauss heavy Necron Army. Probably with Imotek so you can call down the lightning on them too.

The close second would either be a Grav-Centurians heavy Marine army.

Everyone else would be hit or miss based on what you bring.

I almost think if you're facing a Knight Army you should get a roll on the Lords of War Warlord Traits table and possibly even be using those rules just because you're facing super heavies.

My friend ran his bug army in a Blue table report against 5 Knights and won. The stealers were getting a lot of rends and his Carnifexes were getting some good hammer of wrath rolls.

If you're managing to charge with 2+ Carnies then you have a chance, however if you're managing to charge with several Carnies I can't help but feel your opponent isn't doing his/her job right.

If you get lucky with stealers then that helps, but you have to get lucky. On average it takes 27 attacks to do 1 HP of damage with rending stealers, given stealers only have 2 attacks, cost 14pts each and die in droves to stomp attacks, I don't see how you're going to get far without a lot of luck.

It also wouldn't be a standard TAC competitive list with the hordes of stealers you need to dent a Knight.

I actually think that one knight was rended to destruction by stealers and a couple others were sent well along the way, with Carnifexes finishing the job.

Seems IK armies suffer against mass flyers.

One IK army got housed by several vendettas and another could not kill the necron airforce.

Relapse wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I think the army that would love to face a Knight army the most would be a Gauss heavy Necron Army. Probably with Imotek so you can call down the lightning on them too.

The close second would either be a Grav-Centurians heavy Marine army.

Everyone else would be hit or miss based on what you bring.

I almost think if you're facing a Knight Army you should get a roll on the Lords of War Warlord Traits table and possibly even be using those rules just because you're facing super heavies.

My friend ran his bug army in a Blue table report against 5 Knights and won. The stealers were getting a lot of rends and his Carnifexes were getting some good hammer of wrath rolls.

If you're managing to charge with 2+ Carnies then you have a chance, however if you're managing to charge with several Carnies I can't help but feel your opponent isn't doing his/her job right.

If you get lucky with stealers then that helps, but you have to get lucky. On average it takes 27 attacks to do 1 HP of damage with rending stealers, given stealers only have 2 attacks, cost 14pts each and die in droves to stomp attacks, I don't see how you're going to get far without a lot of luck.

It also wouldn't be a standard TAC competitive list with the hordes of stealers you need to dent a Knight.

I actually think that one knight was rended to destruction by stealers and a couple others were sent well along the way, with Carnifexes finishing the job.

So he either took a HUGE amount of stealers or was incredibly lucky

Watched TastyTaste play against several people at my birthday party the other day with his 3 knights and supporting force.

Everyone had a great time. He did, and all of his opponents enjoyed themselves.

So I think it really depends on your attitude.

 cvtuttle wrote:
Watched TastyTaste play against several people at my birthday party the other day with his 3 knights and supporting force.

Everyone had a great time. He did, and all of his opponents enjoyed themselves.

So I think it really depends on your attitude.

That's mostly because the frontline guys love their frankenhammer.

 Ravenous D wrote:

 cvtuttle wrote:
Watched TastyTaste play against several people at my birthday party the other day with his 3 knights and supporting force.

Everyone had a great time. He did, and all of his opponents enjoyed themselves.

So I think it really depends on your attitude.

That's mostly because the frontline guys love their frankenhammer.

This had nothing to do with Frontline gaming... so that makes no sense whatsoever.

Martel732 wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
At the end of the day, if I wanted to play Adeptus Titanicus I would play Battletech because it's a better game of giant robots.

Given how crappy Battletech is, that's quite an indictment.

At least Battletech has a real Warhammer. :p

 OzTeG8ndPwRfl wrote:

 BrotherHaraldus wrote:
Stomp attacks wound nobz on a 2+

Stomp attack was described earlier to me as a S6 AP4 Blast template two thirds of the time. S6 on T5 of a Nob biker bounds on a 3+. But that information is dependent on that guy giving me the correct info, for all I know he lied.

I said 2+ because you were talking about Nobz, not Nob Bikers.

I personally assume that Nobz on foot are the default build, like in the codex, unless specified as riding bikes.

People aren't even playing Knights to their full potential, you can buff them with Librarians and do all kinds of crazyness.

 BrotherHaraldus wrote:

 OzTeG8ndPwRfl wrote:

 BrotherHaraldus wrote:
Stomp attacks wound nobz on a 2+

Stomp attack was described earlier to me as a S6 AP4 Blast template two thirds of the time. S6 on T5 of a Nob biker bounds on a 3+. But that information is dependent on that guy giving me the correct info, for all I know he lied.

I said 2+ because you were talking about Nobz, not Nob Bikers.

I personally assume that Nobz on foot are the default build, like in the codex, unless specified as riding bikes.

I said this:

I did not, my best friend did, he multi assaulted three of them with two Nob biker mobs, I know he killed two right there and the third blew up when the other two did. My buddy is still laughing about it. Only a few Nobs survived the explosions, but he did a good chunk of damage in one turn. I think his death roller killed one as well. The death roller works in the movement phase so they can avoid the shields with some finagling.

Their small numbers and the fact they only get three attacks that ignore saves is their downfall. And their shield doesn't work in melee either so it is a nice place to be. Remember that AP 2 weapons get +1 on the damage chart, and they hurt eachother when grouped up.

I feel like if you put your big choppas up front to take the D attacks and save your Klaws they fall fast in melee. Besides their ranged weapons can't instant death nob bikers, so they will get to melee most of the time.

 OzTeG8ndPwRfl wrote:

He didn't use them against me, don't know if he used them against the orks, but against nobs they only wound on 3+ and are saved on a 5++ 5+ so even if he did use them against the Nobs the same thing was likely to happen.

And I responded to this.

I do not see the word 'bike' here.

Sorry if I come across as pedantic, but Stomp attacks do wound Nobz on 2+

I took a Knight with my IG in its first game against a returning player without much guilt, I took a fluffy light infantry IG list and my only other vehicle at about 1600 points was a Vendetta though to compensate.

My opponent was fielding Eldar and his list wasn't particularly optimised, but he'd managed to get it down to 3 HP at the end of turn 1 with shooting, it killed a whole bunch of Guardians and then died to his Avatar, since I was hitting on 5's, missing every attack, failing the HoW and he smashed the final 3 HP's off using the vehicle damage chart D3.

I actually ended up losing, with him killing more of my army than I killed of his in PtA. I think I'm going to be a tiny bit less merciless with my next list.

He actually enjoyed it and asked if I'd bring it again, its really not that difficult to kill so long as you can get an angle on the side armour and multiple angles. High WS MC's with a decent amount of attacks should be able to do a fair bit of damage to one.

It wouldn't be fun for me because I play Vanilla SM. Short of SG vets in a DP (which I don't use because it seems ridiculously cheesy and simple to do) I don't see how I could drop more than one.

At the same time, I've played a few strong Eldar and Necron lists lately and it seems almost impossible to win with my fluffy Space Marines, we just don't have enough good anti-tank shooting no matter how you slice it, so against a Eldar/Tau/Necron list it might give me some options playing some, but who knows.

The fact is, it isn't a balanced game at all these days, having been on the receiving end of an awesome optimized Eldar list a few weeks ago, I don't think they would struggle against a couple of Knights, and I don't think I would be able to kill one with two teams of gakky devastators and a speeder!

 mattyrm wrote:
It wouldn't be fun for me because I play Vanilla SM. Short of SG vets in a DP (which I don't use because it seems ridiculously cheesy and simple to do) I don't see how I could drop more than one.

At the same time, I've played a few strong Eldar and Necron lists lately and it seems almost impossible to win with my fluffy Space Marines, we just don't have enough good anti-tank shooting no matter how you slice it, so against a Eldar/Tau/Necron list it might give me some options playing some, but who knows.

The fact is, it isn't a balanced game at all these days, having been on the receiving end of an awesome optimized Eldar list a few weeks ago, I don't think they would struggle against a couple of Knights, and I don't think I would be able to kill one with two teams of gakky devastators and a speeder!

You can't really claim a game is unbalanced when you take a deliberately sub-optimal list, ignoring the easy solutions against optimised lists though, can you?

All you can really deduce is that by playing sub-par lists you get stomped by lists designed efficiently to win, and that's saying nothing about the player, for the record. That's pretty much to be expected, you know.

 Mr.Omega wrote:

 mattyrm wrote:
It wouldn't be fun for me because I play Vanilla SM. Short of SG vets in a DP (which I don't use because it seems ridiculously cheesy and simple to do) I don't see how I could drop more than one.

At the same time, I've played a few strong Eldar and Necron lists lately and it seems almost impossible to win with my fluffy Space Marines, we just don't have enough good anti-tank shooting no matter how you slice it, so against a Eldar/Tau/Necron list it might give me some options playing some, but who knows.

The fact is, it isn't a balanced game at all these days, having been on the receiving end of an awesome optimized Eldar list a few weeks ago, I don't think they would struggle against a couple of Knights, and I don't think I would be able to kill one with two teams of gakky devastators and a speeder!

You can't really claim a game is unbalanced when you take a deliberately sub-optimal list, ignoring the easy solutions against optimised lists though, can you?

All you can really deduce is that by playing sub-par lists you get stomped by lists designed efficiently to win, and that's saying nothing about the player, for the record. That's pretty much to be expected, you know.

Oh yeah fair enough, my friends play stronger lists than me anyway, but as I understand it, tournament professionals will say the same surely?

Tau and Eldar are top tier, vanialla Space Marines aren't, and modern 40k is definitely not balanced, I don't think that is open to debate is it?

 mattyrm wrote:

 Mr.Omega wrote:

 mattyrm wrote:
It wouldn't be fun for me because I play Vanilla SM. Short of SG vets in a DP (which I don't use because it seems ridiculously cheesy and simple to do) I don't see how I could drop more than one.

At the same time, I've played a few strong Eldar and Necron lists lately and it seems almost impossible to win with my fluffy Space Marines, we just don't have enough good anti-tank shooting no matter how you slice it, so against a Eldar/Tau/Necron list it might give me some options playing some, but who knows.

The fact is, it isn't a balanced game at all these days, having been on the receiving end of an awesome optimized Eldar list a few weeks ago, I don't think they would struggle against a couple of Knights, and I don't think I would be able to kill one with two teams of gakky devastators and a speeder!

You can't really claim a game is unbalanced when you take a deliberately sub-optimal list, ignoring the easy solutions against optimised lists though, can you?

All you can really deduce is that by playing sub-par lists you get stomped by lists designed efficiently to win, and that's saying nothing about the player, for the record. That's pretty much to be expected, you know.

Oh yeah fair enough, my friends play stronger lists than me anyway, but as I understand it, tournament professionals will say the same surely?

Tau and Eldar are top tier, vanialla Space Marines aren't, and modern 40k is definitely not balanced, I don't think that is open to debate is it?

Vanilla Space Marines certainly can be top-tier, just with greater difficulty than Eldar or Tau, which is more comparing the percentage of units that are actually competitive and/or potentially powerful with as little need of skill. Though as the trends have been showing, Tau as of late are having just as hard a time as Space Marines getting into the top positions.

Your statement may have some truth in it, but the reasons for which you stated it are fallacious. In my honest opinion, total balance in direct comparisons is impossible, but things like Orks sucking for being so old could be helped, though GW certainly are steam rolling through the line of Codexes needing to be updated. The meta changes, I expect Eldar will get trumped by something eventually, akin to how Space Wolves got trumped as the easier 'dex of 5th.

Out of interest, has anyone played IK vs IK? Would probably come down to the dice.

I like everything that affects the current meta, so bring it on.

I would much rather face three knights than an army whose main purpose is staying off table until turn 5 to get the objectives.

It is not list tailoring to have some AT in your lists. Just because GW screwed over all but a couple of vehicles does not mean you should not be prepared to facing AV13/14.