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.

Disclaimer: this thread will discuss why I "think" the WK is so much cheaper than and Imperial Knight, not why it "should" be. This is basically a speculation on what GW may have been thinking from a rules POV.

Of course GW wants to sell models, but beautiful models can sell themselves and making the WK a LoW means most (reasonable) people will only have 1 anyway. So this will not be the focus of this discussion.

Comparing to the Imperial Knight.
Both move 12", have 6 wounds/hull points, but most people agree that the WK is better than the IK. Granted, but lets analyze that.

AV13 is not equal to T8. In fact, T8 is slightly worse than AV12. Str6, 7, 8, 9, etc, all need the same result to hurt either (i.e. Str8 need 4+ to wound T8, or glance AV12). However, Str5 can also wound T8, but cannot scratch AV12, much less AV13. Plenty of armies can spam str5 & str6 shooting. Also, poison & sniper weapons CAN hurt T8, albeit only on 6's. Given this, GW was probably thinking that the WK is clearly less durable than the IK. They just didn't seem to factor in the 3+ sv and FNP
--------------------------------------------
More Versatility within a single build. What I mean by this is that any IK with a big gun and D-weapon can harm a wider variety of targets than any build of WK. Eldar are specialized afterall. The Knight Errant can kill any vehicle at range with the Melta cannon, or vaporize a multi-model unit since it is a large Blast. It can then charge a unit and bring on the D. No WK build can do this. The double cannon WK can obliterate a tank or 2...or kill 2 guardsmen. Neither the Suncannon or D-glaive WK can kill tanks are range, even if you upgrade the shoulder guns.

So while the double cannon WK easily kills more large single targets that any IK, and the Suncannon WK kills horde units better, and the D-glaive WK is better in CC than any IK due to a higher Init, no WK can do all 3 things as good as any 1 IK. This will be especially true once the new IK codex drops with all their additional options. GW may have used this observation to give the points value to the WK.
-----------------------------------------
After writing this, I have to ask: Do you think these may be good reason as to why the WK is about 100pts cheaper than Imperial knights?

If you don't, please discuss the advantages the WK does have over IKs.

You forget that the WK has his 5+FNP which is only 1 worse than the ion shield of the IK which also only protects 1 side of it.

Also the WK has T8 all around while the IK can be shot in the back and killed much easier.

Finally, the 3+ regular armor save - PAIRED with the 5+FNP if you fail it, makes it overall much more resilient than the IK, which is also a lot more sensitive to melta and the like.

Also, did you forget the WK's SD melee weapon is I5? Compared to a Bloodthirster's I1?

No, GW really are idiots.

I did not forget that, I mentioned it above. Many weapons that can hurt the WK are AP3 or less, and most of the ones that allow the WK his armour save, would not be able to hurt a IK in the first place (like str5 & 6, poison or sniper). D & Instra-death weapons also ignore FNP, but allow the Ion-shield. Again, I am just trying to play GW's advocate (trying to make sense of this for my own sanity)

I agree that the WK is too cheap, but should it be more or less expensive than an IK?

Do you think the versatility is worth the extra cost for the IK, or does being "specialized" have more merit?

The armor save is a BIG deal. Also, the WK is immune to Haywire and Armorbane with easily offsets the other weaknesses (like poison).

Galef wrote:If you don't, please discuss the advantages the WK does have over IKs.

I can't blow up a wraithknight by rolling 7+ on the vehicle damage table. I actually have to deal 6 successful, unsaved wounds to it. So...there's that. If it could be blown up, people would multimelta it all day long.

Can you blow up an IK with a single 7+? I thought it would only take a HP from the initial Pen, then D3 from the 7+, for a max of 4HPs.

Anyway, if the durability difference are a wash, than the only reason has to be the Versatility difference.

Unfortunately, I am one the side of the fence that prefers specialization. I would rather add a WK to kill big vehicles and play other units that can handle hordes, then to play an IK because he can kinda to both.

It doesn't look like the IKs are going to get any cheaper since the WD has the Warden as the same price as the Paladin. Both have a gun and a cc weapon. I really hope that the Gallant (which doesn't have a big gun) is dramatically cheaper that the others. On the flipside, if the Crusader (which has two big guns) is the same cost, then why field any other variant of Knight?

WK can gain toe in cover on ruins - this alone makes it more resilient. It's also a Gargantuan MC so posion/(edit fleshbane still works) is 6+ to wound it. This would be equivalent to superheavy tanks ignoring melta USR and making them wound on 6's lol. WK is simply too tough with a 4+cover save and a 5+ fnp.

Fleshbane still wounds on 2+, but your point is still very valid.

It seems that GW just over-values the durability of AV. Has anyone else noticed that many vehicles have gone up in cost with many of the 7th ed books?

 Galef wrote:
Fleshbane still wounds on 2+, but your point is still very valid.

It seems that GW just over-values the durability of AV. Has anyone else noticed that many vehicles have gone up in cost with many of the 7th ed books?

Well thanks for letting me know that - My group was playing that part wrong.

Belakor: the real man's answer to any kind of Knight

I certainly think they are a reasonable comparison. fleshbane and armourbane washes out. 3+ save on knight is mostly irrelevant die to most weapons shooting it will be Ap3 or better. The 5+ FNP is significant but matches well to void shield.

With that being said, the wraithknight should be around the same points as the knight....375 base for example. that would be reasonable.

cc version is 50 points cheaper, double ranged is 50 points more expensive.

I view the IK like the super heavy version of a Space Marine. Its got good versatility, but against specialized units of the same type, its lacking.

A WK is far more specialized for high value, single model target elimination, while the IK is more of an all-around hell raiser, being decent at soft and hard targets, but struggling a bit against direct threats against it. Since some armies tend to be built around a couple of big nasties that do most of the heavy lifting, the WK is better at dealing with those quickly and so can cripple an army's effectiveness better than an IK.

It has been repeatedly shown in 40k that generalists do not work in 40k compared to their more focused brethren on the battlefield as you can never fully utilize all the aspects of the unit you are using at once. Thus wasted points for things you don't always get to use.

Fleshbane and armorbane don't "wash out" because a GMC always gets its FNP against it, as well as an armor save if it's AP4 or worse and/or a cover save if its a ranged attack. The Knight's invuln only works one side of it.

This is also ignoring that armorbane is more prevalent in the game then fleshbane, and significantly more prevalent then AP2/3 fleshbane.

The Wraithknight is cheaper then a Knight because Games Workshop is bad at writing rules. There is no other reason.

 Galef wrote:
Disclaimer: this thread will discuss why I "think" the WK is so much cheaper than and Imperial Knight, not why it "should" be. This is basically a speculation on what GW may have been thinking from a rules POV.

Of course GW wants to sell models, but beautiful models can sell themselves and making the WK a LoW means most (reasonable) people will only have 1 anyway. So this will not be the focus of this discussion.

Comparing to the Imperial Knight.
Both move 12", have 6 wounds/hull points, but most people agree that the WK is better than the IK. Granted, but lets analyze that.

AV13 is not equal to T8. In fact, T8 is slightly worse than AV12. Str6, 7, 8, 9, etc, all need the same result to hurt either (i.e. Str8 need 4+ to wound T8, or glance AV12). However, Str5 can also wound T8, but cannot scratch AV12, much less AV13. Plenty of armies can spam str5 & str6 shooting. Also, poison & sniper weapons CAN hurt T8, albeit only on 6's. Given this, GW was probably thinking that the WK is clearly less durable than the IK. They just didn't seem to factor in the 3+ sv and FNP

To some degree perhaps, T8 is more vulnerable to lighter weapons than AV13, as well as things like Poison and Sniper, however a T based model also doesn't have a damage table, and while SH's ignore most results, a single Meltagun can't take 4 wounds off a WK, while it can do so to an IK (I just did it last night, pen'd with AP1, rolled a 6, then another 6 for the D3 additional hull points), though I guess there's Force Weapons and a few things that inflict Instant Death that may have the same effect, they're not as common and almost are almost all melee weapons (IIRC the only ranged weapon exceptions are Psilencers that don't have the strength to hurt a WK and a single Vanquisher specific HQ upgrade for an IA Armoured Battlegroup list).

So while there's some merit to that line of thinking, the IK also has its own vulnerabilities that the WK does not, on top of not having an armor save or FNP and just a uni-directional (shooting phase only) 4++.

--------------------------------------------
More Versatility within a single build. What I mean by this is that any IK with a big gun and D-weapon can harm a wider variety of targets than any build of WK. Eldar are specialized afterall. The Knight Errant can kill any vehicle at range with the Melta cannon, or vaporize a multi-model unit since it is a large Blast. It can then charge a unit and bring on the D. No WK build can do this. The double cannon WK can obliterate a tank or 2...or kill 2 guardsmen. Neither the Suncannon or D-glaive WK can kill tanks are range, even if you upgrade the shoulder guns.

Hrm, I'd consider this to be very marginal at best. Sure, the Knight weapons have Blast qualities, but even as fearsome as they are, aren't anything near as scary to MC's, GC's, or vehicles as the two D shots are, the primary bonus really is being better anti-infantry, which can be offset to some degree by taking a couple of Scatterlasers (which also function much more reliably as AA if needed than anything a Knight has).

They're *different* in terms of the versatility of their firepower, but I'm not sure I'd say the IK's are outright more versatile. The WK will do better against "hard", singular targets, while the IK's will do better against infantry targets, and both will have some fuzzy middle grounds, but the WK has additional options it can bring to address that (such as two shoulder mounted Scatterlasers).

Lets also not forget that the WK has an extra melee attack and higher Init in CC, and while it won't automatically have D strength melee attacks, that certainly does make a difference as well.

So while the double cannon WK easily kills more large single targets that any IK, and the Suncannon WK kills horde units better, and the D-glaive WK is better in CC than any IK due to a higher Init, no WK can do all 3 things as good as any 1 IK. This will be especially true once the new IK codex drops with all their additional options. GW may have used this observation to give the points value to the WK.

Looking at some of the leaks, even the cheapest one with IIRC no guns is still like 30pts more than the WK with two D weapons, while the IK with two gun arms and no D weapons is like 425pts

After writing this, I have to ask: Do you think these may be good reason as to why the WK is about 100pts cheaper than Imperial knights?

I really just don't think there's a good reason for it to be any appreciably cheaper than the IK going through like this.

Another observation I notice from the WD, is that the Warden has the LoW symbol, meaning that it is possible that all Knights are now classed as LoW, even when fielded in their detachment.

This will mean that tournaments may have to re-evaluate any LoW restrictions they may have.

Straight out of the gate, most tourneys are only allowing 1 or no LoW, meaning only 1 WK or not at all, yet the current Knight codex would still be allowed free reign.

All the Imperial Knights are now LoW.

 Galef wrote:
Another observation I notice from the WD, is that the Warden has the LoW symbol, meaning that it is possible that all Knights are now classed as LoW, even when fielded in their detachment.

This will mean that tournaments may have to re-evaluate any LoW restrictions they may have.

Straight out of the gate, most tourneys are only allowing 1 or no LoW, meaning only 1 WK or not at all, yet the current Knight codex would still be allowed free reign.

They are LoW, so will likely be out(NOVA) or limited to 0-1(BAO), at least State Side.



T8 6W FNP 3+ AS is more durable in practice than AV13/12 6HP 4++(Single Arc Shooting) The Vehicle Damage Table is murder, and against anything that is not AP 3 the WraithKnight has 3+/5+++ and often will have 4+/5+++.

Even if we call them equal, the Specialist should not be costed at 3/4th the cost of the Generalist, they should have been comparable making the Wraithknight undercosted by ~80pts. Ranged D is vastly more valuable than CC D.


There was no sanity in that pricing scheme for the Wraithknight, at 395 I would have rolled my eyes but thought it fair, at 295 it is utterly under-costed and broken. As is pricing the Sword/Shield and Suncannon/Shield at the same points cost. The Dual D should have been an appropriately costed upgrade, 295 is fair for the defensive chassis with the Sword/Shield, even without D Melee it is still an absolute beast in CC with access to Stomp.

Well, I guess I will be playing my WK with only 5 wounds in friendly games to compensate for the cost deficit.

I think you're all missing the point here. In WD it was stopped by a unit of DW knights. There. Simple. All you have to do is buy the DA codex, ally a pair of knights, get them into charge range of a WK somehow, turn on smite mode and laugh and cheer as you destroyed the biggest baddest model out there.

You're welcome.

 Inkubas wrote:
I think you're all missing the point here. In WD it was stopped by a unit of DW knights. There. Simple. All you have to do is buy the DA codex, ally a pair of knights, get them into charge range of a WK somehow, turn on smite mode and laugh and cheer as you destroyed the biggest baddest model out there.

You're welcome.

Ha! I knew nothing can hold a candle to the DA codex.

TWC with fists are an excellent counter as well. The WK cant outrun them for more than 1 turn and if even 2-3 TWC survive, they will pummel the WK into shards of wraithbone

When writing your comparison did you include that the wraithknight can take 2 shoulder mounted guns to take care of infantry? I usually put 2 star cannons on mine allowing it to soften up things like marines while I am targeting knights and tanks with the D.

 Galef wrote:
TWC with fists are an excellent counter as well. The WK cant outrun them for more than 1 turn and if even 2-3 TWC survive, they will pummel the WK into shards of wraithbone

the issue is that in most games, there isnt the vacuum of just wraithknight vs TWC.

 Xerics wrote:
When writing your comparison did you include that the wraithknight can take 2 shoulder mounted guns to take care of infantry? I usually put 2 star cannons on mine allowing it to soften up things like marines while I am targeting knights and tanks with the D.

I purposely did not because there is currently debate as to whether GC can fire more than 2 weapons. The argument is that the GC are additions to the MC rules, and therefore do not override the 2 weapon limit.

So if we assume that, only the Wcannon build can take out heavy AV at range, but cant deal with big squads. All the should mounted guns are str6, and therefore cannot reliable deal with big targets. Also, since there is no dispute that Super Heavies can fire all their weapons, an IK can fire its stubber at a unit it wants to charge.

I killed one with a lucky 5 man GK terminator squad with force activated with 4 halbred and a hammer. It was not my desired attack method but I was out of options and it paid to be bold in this case.

That same squad would have been pulverized by the knight so I guess it is worth mentioning that the WK is more vulnerable to a wider range of CC targets while the IK kinda invites anything into CC with it with a big smile on it's face. This is about the only time armor value is better than toughness. I still don't see a realistic reason why a Wk should cost significantly less than an IK.

 Xenomancers wrote:
This is about the only time armor value is better than toughness.

Bingo! GW seems to think 40K is a CC game, so many of their decisions could be based on this

 Galef wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
This is about the only time armor value is better than toughness.

Bingo! GW seems to think 40K is a CC game, so many of their decisions could be based on this

HAHA, I wonder what gives them that impression? It certainly can't be the rules they provide which basically never allow for assault and always allow you to shoot. Read the rules GW!

 Xenomancers wrote:
WK can gain toe in cover on ruins - this alone makes it more resilient. It's also a Gargantuan MC so posion/feshbane is 6+ to wound it. This would be equivalent to superheavy tanks ignoring melta USR and making them wound on 6's lol. WK is simply too tough with a 4+cover save and a 5+ fnp.

Poison and sniper wounds on 6. Fleshbane wounds on 2 as do other to wound modifiers like Hunters From Hyperspace from the crons.