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 recently picked up the Imperial Knights Renegade game, and being a CSM player I plan on using both as allies(1 set up for antI infantasy and the other anti armor). With these additions has CSM gotten any better? What has your experience been?

Yeah, it gives CSM a bite and a bit of heavy armour they really needed. But does a Renegade Knight count as CSMs?

I don't think they count as CSM, but if I remember correctly they do count as battle brothers.

Also Forgeworld released the Chaos Knight. So you can use a knight in a CSM army plus get a few extra rules out of it. I'm pretty sure you can get the rules from FW's website also.

The chaos knight is experimental, many has issues with these.

Anyway, the knight didn't make CSM less bad, as its not CSM.
Its a renegade knight. usually allied with CSM, but not a CSM.

And it does not solve any of the CSM issues, it just makes it so that CSM have another way to opt out of actually playing CSM.
Its the same as saying IG got better when admech came out, as they got yet another way to not play IG.

It was a weak attempt to appease chaos players while at the same time selling more Knight kits.

It was more self-serving on GW's part than an actual attempt to fix chaos.

One new unit does not fix a codex!
Including massive superheavy units in an army is a bit of a fudge in terms of fixing that army.
It's a bit like saying that Knights fix Sisters of Battle!

Correct me if i'm wrong but didn't CSM got Chaos Knights rather than Renegade Knights? I.e. Marks & Daemon of X for the 5++?

edit: Aaand, i'll just answer for myself
https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/resources/fw_site/fw_pdfs/Warhammer_40000/Chaos_Knight.pdf

Renegade Knights are the GW ones. Chaos Knights are from FW and get access to the marks, but the Renegade Knights can use two of the same weapon unlike their loyalist counterparts which makes them better for some builds.

 Gamgee wrote:
Renegade Knights are the GW ones. Chaos Knights are from FW and get access to the marks, but the Renegade Knights can use two of the same weapon unlike their loyalist counterparts which makes them better for some builds.

Sooo.. you can play them as either? Khorne Knight Paladin for more chop-chop or a Renegade knight for more dakka?

 EverlastingNewb wrote:
Correct me if i'm wrong but didn't CSM got Chaos Knights rather than Renegade Knights? I.e. Marks & Daemon of X for the 5++?

edit: Aaand, i'll just answer for myself
https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/resources/fw_site/fw_pdfs/Warhammer_40000/Chaos_Knight.pdf

They count as the Daemon of X, but they don't get the Daemon of X rules.

Did that ever get answered officially? As far as I remember there was a only a mail that could be taken either way.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 EverlastingNewb wrote:
Correct me if i'm wrong but didn't CSM got Chaos Knights rather than Renegade Knights? I.e. Marks & Daemon of X for the 5++?

edit: Aaand, i'll just answer for myself
https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/resources/fw_site/fw_pdfs/Warhammer_40000/Chaos_Knight.pdf

They count as the Daemon of X, but they don't get the Daemon of X rules.

Yeah, no.

A model with this special rule gains the Daemon and[..]

Daemon USR gives 5++ and fear.

For the Daemon of X, there's no official statement aside of the natfka thingy
http://natfka.blogspot.de/2015/07/chaos-knight-question-answered.html?m=1

 BoomWolf wrote:
And it does not solve any of the CSM issues, it just makes it so that CSM have another way to opt out of actually playing CSM.
Its the same as saying IG got better when admech came out, as they got yet another way to not play IG.

Thank you for so eloquently phrasing this. I know a few people had said that CSM is fixed now with these knights and the Black Legion Sorcerer cabal, but this is exactly why that's not true. And the Black Legion Sorcerer formation is only good because everything else is so insane that "getting to use your opponent's stuff" is game-breaking. That's not a strategy, it's a gimmick.

Nevermind

Perhaps i worded this incorrectly. Allow me to rephrase, has taking a renegade/chaos knight as an ally added any real potential to a CSM army?

I am well aware of the numerous flaws of the current csm codex, been playing them since the new codex came out. I also understand that adding an ally doesn't fix the problems of the codex. I'm just curious if adding the knights to the equation has improved helped, hurt, or done nothing for csm lists.

 l0k1 wrote:
Perhaps i worded this incorrectly. Allow me to rephrase, has taking a renegade/chaos knight as an ally added any real potential to a CSM army?

I am well aware of the numerous flaws of the current csm codex, been playing them since the new codex came out. I also understand that adding an ally doesn't fix the problems of the codex. I'm just curious if adding the knights to the equation has improved helped, hurt, or done nothing for csm lists.

Done nothing, since you can effectively do whatever you were already trying to do with a loyalist book better and/or cheaper already.

Don't get me wrong, many chaos lists would be improved by taking a knight or 3, but that's just because there's less CSM in their list.

- Want to invis a knight? SM do it better since they can cast on 2's
- Want to run armour overload? SM demi company/armoured spearhead or IG tank company does it better
- Want to do a massive assault rush with non tanks? White scars/ravenwing/thundercav all do it better.
- Want to run an assault dreadnaught all walker army? SW and BA can both do pure dread lists, both get pods. Marines can do a mostly dread list and get more attacks and pods.
- Want to spam massive numbers of infantry with ObSec? Why aren't you taking guard conscripts for cheaper while being fearless?

The only thing I can think of is 3 knights and a 2 heldrake wing in 1500, but even then, you can do the same thing with a stormwing or the newer one with the talons and a speeder.

 l0k1 wrote:
Perhaps i worded this incorrectly. Allow me to rephrase, has taking a renegade/chaos knight as an ally added any real potential to a CSM army?

I am well aware of the numerous flaws of the current csm codex, been playing them since the new codex came out. I also understand that adding an ally doesn't fix the problems of the codex. I'm just curious if adding the knights to the equation has improved helped, hurt, or done nothing for csm lists.

Yes it does since it will increase the power of a Chaos list dramatically, but will that make Chaos "good" from an ITC competitive sense? No. I even said that way back. Still as long as your meta is casual and not too competitive it will do fine, but if your in a competitive meta it likely won't make much difference.

 CT GAMER wrote:
It was a weak attempt to appease chaos players while at the same time selling more Knight kits.

It was more self-serving on GW's part than an actual attempt to fix chaos.

Wow GW can't win with you apparently. GW releases rules that people have wanted for ages (rules for chaos knights) and you dismiss it as self serving. course it is, they're a busniess. they do stuff because it'll sell. thing is, capialism is all about self serving busniess actions being to the benifit of the consumer.

 EverlastingNewb wrote:
Correct me if i'm wrong but didn't CSM got Chaos Knights rather than Renegade Knights? I.e. Marks & Daemon of X for the 5++?

edit: Aaand, i'll just answer for myself
https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/resources/fw_site/fw_pdfs/Warhammer_40000/Chaos_Knight.pdf

Forge World is not legal. Just read the rules on how miniatures move in 40K, and GW keeps saying Citadel Miniatures tm, so therefore Forge World Chaos Knights are not legal since they are not Citadel Miniatures tm. Ok, I am kidding about FW not being legal, just having some fun. I am bored.

As for Regade Knights making CSM better, how is taking less of something making it better?

Ironically Chaos has always been strongest when it is united. Not some dumb legions/bands of marines trying to accomplish it on their own.

So any sort of Chaos undivided is good in my book. Chaos Marines would be the focal point, but not the be all and end all. It's why I'm a fan of renegades list FW does. Just need Dark Mechanicum now and you can play a true proper chaos list.

 Drasius wrote:

 l0k1 wrote:
Perhaps i worded this incorrectly. Allow me to rephrase, has taking a renegade/chaos knight as an ally added any real potential to a CSM army?

I am well aware of the numerous flaws of the current csm codex, been playing them since the new codex came out. I also understand that adding an ally doesn't fix the problems of the codex. I'm just curious if adding the knights to the equation has improved helped, hurt, or done nothing for csm lists.

Done nothing, since you can effectively do whatever you were already trying to do with a loyalist book better and/or cheaper already.

Don't get me wrong, many chaos lists would be improved by taking a knight or 3, but that's just because there's less CSM in their list.

Smack my bum and call me Sally, someone's bitter. How comes that Chaos, outside of ITC can actually win games if they're inferior to
literally anything?

 Drasius wrote:
Want to invis a knight? SM do it better since they can cast on 2's

Spell Familiars harness at 75% success, Conclave at 83%.

You might have to throw an extra WC at the spell, but ML3 Sorcerers generate WC more efficiently.

- 2x ML2 Librarians, 1x ML1 Librarian: 245pts, harnesses 4.2WC
- 2x ML3 Sorcerers: 250pts, harnesses 4.5WC

So in terms of casting Invis, the Sorcerers are actually not at a significant disadvantage.

BrianDavion wrote:

 CT GAMER wrote:
It was a weak attempt to appease chaos players while at the same time selling more Knight kits.

It was more self-serving on GW's part than an actual attempt to fix chaos.

Wow GW can't win with you apparently. GW releases rules that people have wanted for ages (rules for chaos knights) and you dismiss it as self serving. course it is, they're a busniess. they do stuff because it'll sell. thing is, capialism is all about self serving busniess actions being to the benifit of the consumer.

They can win with me by making chaos not suck.

Address the core elements of the codex and the army specific rules. I don't want giant robots, robo-space dragons, nor Dinobots. This is Chaos not Transformers...

 CT GAMER wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 CT GAMER wrote:
It was a weak attempt to appease chaos players while at the same time selling more Knight kits.

It was more self-serving on GW's part than an actual attempt to fix chaos.

Wow GW can't win with you apparently. GW releases rules that people have wanted for ages (rules for chaos knights) and you dismiss it as self serving. course it is, they're a busniess. they do stuff because it'll sell. thing is, capialism is all about self serving busniess actions being to the benifit of the consumer.

They can win with me by making chaos not suck.

Address the core elements of the codex and the army specific rules. I don't want giant robots, robo-space dragons, nor Dinobots. This is Chaos not Transformers...

I wonder if the fans of "chaos" are confusing GW. People who play "chaos" bitch endlessly for lack of new stuff and wanting a better codex. Last I checked there is no "chaos" codex. So maybe be a little more specific. You and the other fans want chaos space marines to be better. Not chaos. Chaos is doing great. Chaos death stars do astounding at ITC events. Be careful what you ask for. Chaos Space Marines are not the sum totality of "chaos".

 EverlastingNewb wrote:
Smack my bum and call me Sally, someone's bitter. How comes that Chaos, outside of ITC can actually win games if they're inferior to
literally anything?

They generally don't in any sort of competative meta, and even then it's generally wins against other bottom feeders like BA/DE/Orks etc. My win rate with CSM is below 30% (and falling after being above 50% until the start of 7th), but my win rate with both SM and Daemons is above 70% (and that's without using demicompany/gladius/incursion etc).

Yoyoyo wrote:

 Drasius wrote:
Want to invis a knight? SM do it better since they can cast on 2's

Spell Familiars harness at 75% success, Conclave at 83%.

You might have to throw an extra WC at the spell, but ML3 Sorcerers generate WC more efficiently.

- 2x ML2 Librarians, 1x ML1 Librarian: 245pts, harnesses 4.2WC
- 2x ML3 Sorcerers: 250pts, harnesses 4.5WC

So in terms of casting Invis, the Sorcerers are actually not at a significant disadvantage.

And by throwing more dice, you perils more often. If you roll the same number of dice, you're less consistant in getting your powers off. Not to mention that the loyalists have 2 extra wounds. To be honest, you should be looking at the points required to harness warp charge;

3x ML2 libbies = 270 points = 6 warp charge - Harnesses 5 warp charge = 54 points per warp charge
2x ML3 Sorcs w/ spell familiars = 250 points = 6 warp charge - Harness 4.5 warp charge = 55.5 points per warp charge

Loyalists do it better, even before you count tigurius into the mix (where the almost certainty of rolling invis or whatever other power you want is crucial) and have a larger and better range of things to cast their spells on. And that's just for WC1 powers. Once you start getting into WC2 or 3 powers, then the loyalists pull even further ahead with something like 99.6% chance of a loyalist getting off a WC3 power with 6 dice vs a ~92% chance for a traitor. Eliminating risk is a huge factor in winning, just look at why re-rolls and volume of fire is such a huge part of the meta, because they mitigate the odd bad roll. The increased odds of a larger number of successes for the loyalists also makes their powers harder to deny as a final kick in the teeth for traitor forces.

There is no reason to run CSM as CSM since SM (of some flavour) do everything better.

The Sorc is more likely to Perils with another die, true. But also more likely to get the spell off.

Sorc throwing 3 dice: 2.25WC
Conclave throwing 2 dice: 1.67WC.

You're making a very selective argument to support your point, so I'm guessing you may not be completely objective. There's a ton of other factors you're ignoring, like an increased chance of duplicating powers with ML2 Psykers, and being restricted to casting 2x powers at a 2+ (as per the draft FAQ).

Tigurius is a different story. But then again, so is Be'lakor. And that's not the argument you made.

Do you see what I mean?

I prefer the FW Chaos Knight because of the +5 invul save over Renegade knight and 3 guns. But tomatoes or tomatoes.

 FeindusMaximus wrote:
I prefer the FW Chaos Knight because of the +5 invul save over Renegade knight and 3 guns. But tomatoes or tomatoes.

It depends on the list and build really. Generally speaking the FW one is more useful but there are a few builds where having RK's would be better. Frontline did a nice analysis of it sometime ago.

Yoyoyo wrote:
The Sorc is more likely to Perils with another die, true. But also more likely to get the spell off.

Sorc throwing 3 dice: 2.25WC
Conclave throwing 2 dice: 1.67WC.

You're making a very selective argument to support your point, so I'm guessing you may not be completely objective. There's a ton of other factors you're ignoring, like an increased chance of duplicating powers with ML2 Psykers, and being restricted to casting 2x powers at a 2+ (as per the draft FAQ).

Tigurius is a different story. But then again, so is Be'lakor. And that's not the argument you made.

Do you see what I mean?

And you're quoting on the librarius having more dice than the sorcs.

How Belakor comes into this I don't know, especially since he's more expensive than 3 librarians, casts on a 4, doesn't have a spell familiar and requires a cultist/nurgling tax to take him.

I'm not the one being selective here friend.

A sorceror with spell familiar trying to cast a WC 3 power on 6 dice succeeds 88.1% of the time.
A Librarius conclave casting a WC 3 power on 6 dice succeeds 99% of the time (or 12.3% more often than an equal number of warp charge from sorcerors)

A sorceror with spell familiar trying to cast a WC 2 power on 3 dice succeeds 75% of the time.
A Librarius conclave casting a WC 2 power on 3 dice succeeds 92.3% of the time (or 23% more often than an equal number of warp charge from sorcerors)

That is a notable difference considering that you can generate warp charge more efficiently with a trio of ML2 libbies than you can with a pair of ML3 sorcs.

Seeing as how you will have to throw more dice to have the same % chance to get your spells off, meaning more perils, it also means that Space marine librarians are better daemon summoners than CSM sorcerors. Do you think that is as intended? Do you think that is balanced?

As for casting more powers, I don't know what game you play, but having enough dice to reliably cast more than 2 or 3 important powers with pure CSM is an extreme rarity, regardless of how many powers they're capable of casting.