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.

I play a knight army for fluff and I really like it but I find that they tend to die quickly in many cases and Im often left wondering if maybe they need some adjustments with all the changes to monstrous creatures and there being so much out there that can rip them apart or glance them to death. I guess I just wish they played a little stronger. What changes do you think could be made to make them a more viable choice for gameplay in numbers?

Personally, i think they need a boost in survivability. Something along the lines of the Ion shield 4+ being on all sides and working in combat. That may be a bit extreme but I do feel like they need some type of subtle change to make them wht they should be, which is to say something strong enough to make a decent force out of by itself.

Nope. There are too many weapons they are straight up immune to. I have to pack an inordinate amount of melta in my lists just because these things exist. They should actually be a bit flimsier, I think. And their weapons need nerfed a bit, too.

Possibly a permanent 5+ against glancing hits and the ion shield being 4+ against everything on a facing of your choice?

Unfortunately that makes them very similar to the chaos kinghts when they get a mark that they pay points for.

Edit: I do believe all vehicles should get a 5+ against glances though so I don't know.

Make the ion shield 5++ invuln and leave it at that. They are too hard for TAC lists to kill already.

Just to clarify, we're talking Imperial Knights, right? I have to think so based on the ion shield comment, but it was a bit unclear.

Imperial Knights are odd in that they're sort of a rock, paper, scissors army that is composed entirely of rocks. Armies that can deal with them can deal with them. If your opponent happened to bring some strength d stuff, lots of haywire attacks, drop pod melta, or any number of other things that are effective against knights, he's basically bringing the paper to your rock. On the other hand, there are plenty of armies (tyranids and daemons mostly) that will really struggle to do anything at all to a bunch of high AV walkers with stomp.

Running an army of knights is like running an army of flyers; armies that bring lots of air will bring you down hard, and armies that don't have a lot of anti-air will feel like they can't meaningfully hurt you at all. I've seen grey knight players win games against Imperial Knights by simply standing on more objectives than the adamantine lance and refusing to die quickly enough to lose the game.

I'm generally opposed to a rule that makes the ion shield work on all sides. Forcing your opponent to deploy the shield against one side and then sucker punching him in the other side is an interesting interaction. Make the shield affect all sides would reduce the number of interesting decisions your opponents have to make.

No.

Stomp does, however.

Yeah, dreadknight are pretty damn broken, hence why you always see at least 2, even in a 1000 point game!

Wait, someone wants to buff Knights?

No. They're fine. If anything, they need a nerf.

trying to play a one dimensional army list and then being concerned that it underperforms doesnt show me the need for a change to the units. The game isnt designed to benefit a list like that, IMO it would be a really stupid game if 5 superheavies could be a viable list.

And NO...


If anything they need to be nerfed in a few ways.

There's a reason everybody takes one, and it has nothing to do with fluff.

They should have stayed as LOW and not been made into a codex army.


I am looking forward to Codex:Thunderhawk however...

I think they are fine.

currently I play two armies that are kinda crippled against most knight army lists.

either not enough glancing or not enough pen power.

they (as said above) are a Rock Paper Scissors army, and that is not a bad thing, and really something that I would like more of in 40k (for all armies that is, not just the few that GW hasn't updated yet).

They are not flimsy, and have enough damage output, and damage absorption to balance one another out. If anything, the upgrade they need is some type of way to modify your army, or to be a force modifier (similar to the stompa for the orks).

just my $0.02.

Actually, knights are fine as is. At my house, they take damage from the chart, but with the following exceptions

Ignore crew stunned/shaken
Immobilized results halve movement speed. Multiple immobilized results don't lower this further, but does cause the extra hull point loss as normal.

I see what you guys are saying. I think my problem is that at my LGS we usually do campaigns with paired games where we're restricted to two books for the duration. So whenever anyone plays me they pretty much know to bring a super anti-knight list. Its still the rock paper scissor analogy, but my opponent always knows I'm throwing rock... I think maybe it skewing my perspective on the matter.

I think the Wraith Knight needs a nerf or points increase. The darn thing gets an invul save all around and jumps around! No way should my 5 IK lose to 2 WK. Or you make the Gallant 295pts and all the other Knights 30pts cheaper.

Imperial Knights gets smashed by monsterous creatures. MC such as daemon princes get lucky with their 5++ invul. Also their high WS makes it very hard for me to hit with a WS4.

I wish their was the venerable upgrade that makes the opponents re roll their successful penetration. Atleast theh get to cheat their rolls is they good at it.

Maybe an upgrade to disable all haywire results from 2-5. Maybe some Ceramite Armor upgrade to stop melta.

Knights are very strong, for the points, and don't need any buffs or modifications at all. Your real problem seems to be that you're a one trick pony.
Why not bring them as allies to another army? That way you still have the punch of a Knight, but your opponent has other stuff to deal with.
Anyone would also start to lose in fairly short order if they played the same thing again and again, as it gives their opponents time to learn how to neutralise and manipulate the army.

Less a problem with the Knights themselves and more a problem with the stupid levels of power creep. Eldar alone have Haywire, AP0 Meltas, and ohh yeah what are those things called again? A plethora of D weapons? yup.

The biggest problem knights face is that most armies have WAY to much anti tank weaponry.

This thread is so ambigious.

Wraithknights?
Dreadknights?
Imperial Knights?
GODDAMN IT OP SPECIFY!

>Actually he said they need to be strongers so Wraith and Dread are clearly not the topic

 Dramagod2 wrote:
I see what you guys are saying. I think my problem is that at my LGS we usually do campaigns with paired games where we're restricted to two books for the duration. So whenever anyone plays me they pretty much know to bring a super anti-knight list. Its still the rock paper scissor analogy, but my opponent always knows I'm throwing rock... I think maybe it skewing my perspective on the matter.

It is very much skewing your perspective.

Knights are fine, and if anything, overpowered and could use a touch of the old nerf bat.

With Wraithknights existing Imperial Knights are weak.

 Reinokarite wrote:
With Wraithknights existing Imperial Knights are weak.

Don't forget with dreadknight too

ninety0ne wrote:
trying to play a one dimensional army list and then being concerned that it underperforms doesnt show me the need for a change to the units. The game isnt designed to benefit a list like that, IMO it would be a really stupid game if 5 superheavies could be a viable list.

It is for the Eldar...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CT GAMER wrote:
Codex:Thunderhawk

Made me cringe.

 Blacksails wrote:
Wait, someone wants to buff Knights?

No. They're fine. If anything, they need a nerf.

Quoted for truth.

Just because a small handful of armies can deal with them easily doesn't mean they need a buff.

Well shoot, Grav exists, buff the Wraithknight! Hmm, no.

 Reinokarite wrote:
With Wraithknights existing Imperial Knights are weak.

I think this may be the main point Im making. I understand that imperial knights are strong against some things and that there are many things in the game which are not a legit threat to them but compared to other giant things in the game, they don't seem to stack up that well. They are pwerful, there is no denying that. With an army of five models theyd better be. My argument is just that compared to how other units (wraithknight, dreadknight), they just seem either overcosted or underpowered. If the wraithknight is the bar, then the imperial is simply not well designed or way to expensive.

The dreadknight is pretty weak against a lot of lists now and will only get weaker as the new codices roll out.

 krodarklorr wrote:

Well shoot, Grav exists, buff the Wraithknight! Hmm, no.

Wait, you mean you think the WK isn't underpowered? At best it can one-shot a tank, that's hardly much. I've seen Lascannons one-shot a tank, and nobody ever called them op. You can take dozens of the things.

I know that asking for balance in this games is kinda a lost cause, but I suppose Im just asking for some type of balance among the superheavies. I realize that for people who don't play knights that you think Im griping over nothing, but anyone who plays them or uses them regularly knows that when compared to other superheavies in the games, they just don't stand up. If I face an eldar army with two wraithknights and a score of other units, either the two wraithknights alone shouldn't be able to wipe out my entire army or my army should be able to hold up better against them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
It just doesnt make sense to have the wraithknight for its cost and then the imperial knight for it's cost, atleast one needs to be changed for there to be any semblance of balance or fairness between the superheavies of different factions

Wraithknights wipe out more armies than IK, though. You NEED very specific weaponry against them or you lose. The same goes for IK, but the weapons are different. It's very easy to field a space marine list that straight up loses to knights every game.

While I believe current imperial knights need neither buff nor nerf, I think specific formations should be kept in check whether by house-ruling or consultations between players.
(If restriction is really needed)
For example, the adamantine lance formation allowing re-rolls on ion shield saves.
That, or Exalted Court of House Terryn, which includes Knight Errants with Interceptor blowing melta pods with impunity or other knights allowing friendly knights to resolve overwatch.

 Dramagod2 wrote:
I know that asking for balance in this games is kinda a lost cause, but I suppose Im just asking for some type of balance among the superheavies. I realize that for people who don't play knights that you think Im griping over nothing, but anyone who plays them or uses them regularly knows that when compared to other superheavies in the games, they just don't stand up. If I face an eldar army with two wraithknights and a score of other units, either the two wraithknights alone shouldn't be able to wipe out my entire army or my army should be able to hold up better against them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
It just doesnt make sense to have the wraithknight for its cost and then the imperial knight for it's cost, atleast one needs to be changed for there to be any semblance of balance or fairness between the superheavies of different factions

But your Imperial Knight (singular) against my Obelisk or Tesseract Vault. We'll see who wins. (Spoiler, more times than not, the Knight wins)

And the only reason Wraithknights are able to "wipe out" Imperial Knights is because of better ranged weapons (aka Strength D). Roll a 6 and boom, dead knight. Once 8th edition comes out and Strength D is nerfed even more (yeah, I'll make that bet) then it shouldn't be as much of a problem.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Selym wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Well shoot, Grav exists, buff the Wraithknight! Hmm, no.

Wait, you mean you think the WK isn't underpowered? At best it can one-shot a tank, that's hardly much. I've seen Lascannons one-shot a tank, and nobody ever called them op. You can take dozens of the things.

Yes, they can one shot a tank, or an Imperial Knight, or a Tervigon. And stomps. Heck, I'm sure against most armies, the Wraithknights do more damage simply by charging things, even without the melee weapon.

So no, Wraithknights are not underpowered.

 krodarklorr wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 krodarklorr wrote:

Well shoot, Grav exists, buff the Wraithknight! Hmm, no.

Wait, you mean you think the WK isn't underpowered? At best it can one-shot a tank, that's hardly much. I've seen Lascannons one-shot a tank, and nobody ever called them op. You can take dozens of the things.

Yes, they can one shot a tank, or an Imperial Knight, or a Tervigon. And stomps. Heck, I'm sure against most armies, the Wraithknights do more damage simply by charging things, even without the melee weapon.

So no, Wraithknights are not underpowered.

T'was the joke before srsness, when all through the forum, no sense of humour appeared, not even a giggle.