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.

Mantorok wrote:

 The Wise Dane wrote:

I guess I can see your point, but when my last opponent took a Knight and a Wyvern against my 500 pt infantry Ork army, that point falls a bit null to me. Sure, easier for your to have a few cool and powerful models, but what about the rest of us, who still want to play the old way?

That's pretty messed up. You shouldn't be bringing Knights at lower than 1000pts if you ask me.
I don't see why they can't incorporate that as a rule for the IK Codex.
FW does it with the Questoris, there are all kinds of weird stipulations for their larger models.
And I think its not unreasonable to say no GMC or Superheavy at sub-1000pts game.
The smallest formation I can even take is a Gallant Lance which is 990 base. for three knights

If you want to run a knights army, you should understand that you cannot play smaller points games.

Anyone remember when there were points barriers for certain units? Granted it was mainly special characters (Abaddon back in 3rd? Required 2K+ points to field iirc). Perhaps some units should have the same restriction, but then you are artificially limiting people who genuinely want to use Knights because they are big stompy robots, not because of their power level.

jeffersonian000 wrote:Nope.
Always wanted to play this style of game at this scale. Been waiting for almost 30 years, and now I get to relive a second childhood. Woot!

SJ

I'm in this camp here, I don't care much for power levels or points-efficiency, hell I field Vanguard Vets duel-wielding Bolt and Plasma pistols because its cool. Yeah it feels like all IoM factions field one Knight, but I have to be the smarter commander when building a list and playing to account for them and adjust accordingly. I don't expect someone to not use a powerful unit for fairness's sake, this is a wargame, fairness goes out the window when dealing with filthy Xenos and Heretics!

I personally love the escalating arms race feel of current 40K, we can't expect to sit around, forever fielding the same infantry + transport + tank formations. If anything we need more stompy robots and monstrous creatures. I shouldn't look at a Close Combat Carnifex and think "Ah, a bullet sponge", I should be soiling my power-armoured panties in fear of what will happen when he gets to my lines. The same applies to the humble Dreadnaught. Is anyone scared of a CQC Dread anymore? Its an engine of destruction and zeal for Emperors sake, relegated to being a rifleman at best (same as the poor lil' Carnifex).

tl:dr - More stompy robots/creatures please.

Except for those lists that don't have stompy robots. Or have gakky stompy robots that are walkers and not the blessed GMCs. Sure, BA have access to IK, but IK are bad, imo, and don't add much to BA, who are admittedly even worse.

7th edition has added super heavies, the mechs you spoke about, and formations. All this has done is make people spend more cash, because if you take a formation you get bonuses for taking a ridiculous amount of troops.

For example, The lion's blade from the dark angels really isn't balanced or fluffy. Where are the elites? The Ravenwing? If you take a loaded Lion's blade you can't really afford to add these other options in 1500-1850 point games.

All 7th has done was turned 40k from a medium scale skirmish game to a game of large scale apocalypse battles. I liked apocalypse, not not for my everyday 40k needs.

I remember building lists where I had to sit down and think of a balanced list with two required troop choices and one required hq... games were a challenge and a blast back then. I am assuming this (well, and making expensive codex books obsolete in less than 14 months) is why most flgs in central WI have dropped 40k tournaments. I used to see 20 folks laying every week, now I'm lucky to see two playing eachother in a casual game. All I see played in X-Wing, card games, and occasional LOTR and AOS (yes, more AOS than 40k).

sad.... bring 6th edition back GW!

 vipoid wrote:
I didn't say they were useless, I said they were virtually useless.

Well you said "virtually immune," I believe. A Wraithknight is actually 4 and a half Carnifexes with FNP.

In addition to Tau, Necron Deathmarks and (ESPECIALLY) Skitarii Dragoons with radium jezzails work pretty well on paper.

Hormrgaunts with toxin sacs also do.

Alcibiades wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
I didn't say they were useless, I said they were virtually useless.

Well you said "virtually immune," I believe.

Same difference, but yes.

Alcibiades wrote:
Well you said "virtually immune," I believe. A Wraithknight is actually 4 and a half Carnifexes with FNP.

And can move twice as fast... and is I5... and has D-weapons.

Alcibiades wrote:

In addition to Tau, Necron Deathmarks and (ESPECIALLY) Skitarii Dragoons with radium jezzails work pretty well on paper.

That's true, but then the Necron ones effectively have Fleshbane on the turn they arrive - thus bypassing the WK's resistance.

Incidentally, any suggestions on the DE front?

 BlaxicanX wrote:
It always weird me out when people try to assert that winning isn't the main point of 40K.

If winning didn't matter, the game wouldn't require you to keep score.

THe object of the game is to win, yes, but the point is to have fun overall, if you lose a game do you not still have fun? You should against a good opponent/friend.

whirlwindstruggle wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
It always weird me out when people try to assert that winning isn't the main point of 40K.

If winning didn't matter, the game wouldn't require you to keep score.

THe object of the game is to win, yes, but the point is to have fun overall, if you lose a game do you not still have fun? You should against a good opponent/friend.

I disagree. 40k is an interesting game at that, actually, since most games doesn't seem to have one way or other that is sure to make the game fun or not, but my experience with the game is that one thing in particulr makes the game less fun for both parts - When one side is losing early, or simply is being pummeled into the ground. For the losing part, it often results in passive aggresiveness and snark out of frustration, and to the winning part, it results in guilt and uneasy cheeriness because them knowing that the loser isn't having fun, and that they have it too easy.

I have legitimately never seen anyone get mad outside that context while playing 40k.