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.

Yes

I was interupted a few times, better not hit submit then before proofreading it

 Wilson wrote:
Wraithknight will become LOW( my own wish)

NO, just NO. Imperial Knights are not LOW and they are worse offenders than WraithKnights. If the WK becomes a LOW, it will have to be a Gargantuan Creatures and that would either make them more OP than they are now, or make them so expensive that they would become unplayable.

 Galef wrote:

 Wilson wrote:
Wraithknight will become LOW( my own wish)

NO, just NO. Imperial Knights are not LOW and they are worse offenders than WraithKnights. If the WK becomes a LOW, it will have to be a Gargantuan Creatures and that would either make them more OP than they are now, or make them so expensive that they would become unplayable.

Imperial Knights are not LoW because they're part of their own Codex.

If there were a Codex: Wraithknight, you would have a point. But since Logan Grimnar, Imotekh, Ghazghkull Thraka, and more are all LoW--there's no reason why the Wraithknight couldn't be.

 Galef wrote:

 Wilson wrote:
Wraithknight will become LOW( my own wish)

NO, just NO. Imperial Knights are not LOW and they are worse offenders than WraithKnights. If the WK becomes a LOW, it will have to be a Gargantuan Creatures and that would either make them more OP than they are now, or make them so expensive that they would become unplayable.

That doesnt bother me teeheheheehhee

The Wraithknight is really not overpowered. That's not to say that Eldar are not, though.

I would love it to be made a Gargantuan (and priced accordingly, of course), because the rules aren't anywhere near as impressive as the model would suggest.

The fact they are jump mc and have 2 heavy wraithcannons on a T8 platform...it needs toning down or made 01. Ala LOW.

Making the wraithknight an eldar knight-titan is where it should have been in the first instance.
Having it as an MC just leaves it with a wildly skewed statline compared to the threats it will face while still being susceptible to 'instand death' strikes. (just how does that work against enclosed machinery?)

 SirDonlad wrote:
Making the wraithknight an eldar knight-titan is where it should have been in the first instance.
Having it as an MC just leaves it with a wildly skewed statline compared to the threats it will face while still being susceptible to 'instand death' strikes. (just how does that work against enclosed machinery?)

Agreed.

I don't really think they are LOW material, when you have things like the eldar titans available for that stuff. Although they could just make it a mini-titian like the IKs.

Just my thoughts: Make it a Gargantuan creature, LoW, the sword a D-Weapon and rise point costs accordingly. Make them as strong as the Exodite Knights used to be, maybe even add the 'eye attack' they had or other upgrades. Then go with a 3 Knights-formation and people can still play with their current armies (whoever thinks 3 Knights is a good strategy).

I am not confident at the moment that the Serpent and/or the Wraithknight will be changed as much as people imagine it will. Necrons weren't nerfed either.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I don't really think they are LOW material, when you have things like the eldar titans available for that stuff. Although they could just make it a mini-titian like the IKs.

The same argument could be made for Ghazghkull Thraka, and yet he's a LoW.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I don't really think they are LOW material, when you have things like the eldar titans available for that stuff. Although they could just make it a mini-titian like the IKs.

The same argument could be made for Ghazghkull Thraka, and yet he's a LoW.

That really has no meaning to the conversation. That's a problem with the ork codex, not the eldar one.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I don't really think they are LOW material, when you have things like the eldar titans available for that stuff. Although they could just make it a mini-titian like the IKs.

The same argument could be made for Ghazghkull Thraka, and yet he's a LoW.

That really has no meaning to the conversation. That's a problem with the ork codex, not the eldar one.

Logan Grimnar is a LoW as well.
And Imotekh.

It actually does have a meaning for the conversation, in that GW has been going out of their way of late to move items to the LoW slot which they feel do not necessarily "fit" in standard games.
The second part of that move is that it was an attempt to make LoWs more widely accepted by having the slot not just encompass things like Baneblades or Lords of Skulls but also include named characters.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I don't really think they are LOW material, when you have things like the eldar titans available for that stuff. Although they could just make it a mini-titian like the IKs.

The same argument could be made for Ghazghkull Thraka, and yet he's a LoW.

That really has no meaning to the conversation. That's a problem with the ork codex, not the eldar one.

Logan Grimnar is a LoW as well.
And Imotekh.

It actually does have a meaning for the conversation, in that GW has been going out of their way of late to move items to the LoW slot which they feel do not necessarily "fit" in standard games.
The second part of that move is that it was an attempt to make LoWs more widely accepted by having the slot not just encompass things like Baneblades or Lords of Skulls but also include named characters.

Just because GW is doing something, doesn't mean it's the right way to do it. I don't think that named characters should be LOW. Or at least if they are, they should be buffed to be a big guy.

I'd really be in favor of making the Wraithknight a Gargantuan Creature - there's no reason why it shouldn't be. It'd give the Wraithlord a better role.

Being a LOW wouldn't mean you can only take one, either - the Eldar 'Great Host' or whatever Decurion style detachment will probably have an Auxiliary choice of a Wraithknight.

Honestly, the main reason I want the wraithknight to become a superheavy or GMC is so I don't have to worry about a lucky stomp roll from tyranid gargantuan creatures who are literally half his size.

Though to be fair, I did make my own superheavy version with my V.D.R. update. (Link in SIG)

If it was controlled by spirit stones like a wraithlord i could see that working, but isn't the wraithknight piloted? something about twins?

All the big eldar constructs other than wraithlord are piloted, IIRC.

 SirDonlad wrote:
If it was controlled by spirit stones like a wraithlord i could see that working, but isn't the wraithknight piloted? something about twins?

The Wraithknight is piloted by "both the living and the dead". One of the twins is still alive and the other is deceased.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 SirDonlad wrote:
If it was controlled by spirit stones like a wraithlord i could see that working, but isn't the wraithknight piloted? something about twins?

The Wraithknight is piloted by "both the living and the dead". One of the twins is still alive and the other is deceased.

“Deceased” is such a harsh word. They prefer “Spiritstone enabled"

 Nevelon wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 SirDonlad wrote:
If it was controlled by spirit stones like a wraithlord i could see that working, but isn't the wraithknight piloted? something about twins?

The Wraithknight is piloted by "both the living and the dead". One of the twins is still alive and the other is deceased.

“Deceased” is such a harsh word. They prefer “Spiritstone enabled"

It's funny because California.

LOW being big things is soo 6th edition.

7th Edition LOW is all about legendary heroes, who probably shouldn't be leading every every piss ant skirmish across the universe.

 adamsouza wrote:
LOW being big things is soo 6th edition.

7th Edition LOW is all about legendary heroes, who probably shouldn't be leading every every piss ant skirmish across the universe.

You don't get to the status of "legendary hero" without grinding for EXP!

Eldar have a number of things that could be moved to the LOW slot.

Eldrad
Avatar
WK

GW don't tend to make units everyone owns in multiples a 0-1 choice all of a sudden.

I would actually be totally down for seeing the Avatar become a badass LoW; thing has been "meh" for as long as I've been playing. However, things becoming LoW don't imply much, if any, rules changes.

Wraithknight needs a solid kick in the pants in terms of points or capacity, however. Jump T8 MC with guns of "just remove the models" is, well, unpleasent. Especially when it costs less than a Leman Russ tank commander.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
GW don't tend to make units everyone owns in multiples a 0-1 choice all of a sudden.

I know this is going to sound catty, but:

“Just play unbound!”

GW has a long history of taking the thing you own lots of and making them shelf-bait, forcing you to buy a bunch of the latest hotness. Going 0-1 is a little harsh, yes. But that’s just a FOC restriction, which is not very relevant in 7th.

Nevelon wrote:

“Deceased” is such a harsh word. They prefer “Spiritstone enabled"

 Frozen Ocean wrote:


You don't get to the status of "legendary hero" without grinding for EXP!

Lol exalted!

Messed up your quoting, there. It's not that I'm desperate for an exaltation, it's that I can't stand formatting errors!

 Nevelon wrote:
Eldar have a number of things that could be moved to the LOW slot.

Eldrad
Avatar
WK

That's a lot of LoW models for faction (in the sense that they compete for the single LoW slot). There's still Revenant too. I think they'd have to look at it as which ones become an either/or situation, and which ones someone would like to put on the table at the same time.

I'm totally up for a BT sized Avatar!!