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.

" A bolter can kill a scatbike"

Bolters can't kill dreadnoughts either. Are dreadnoughts now OP? Killing an IK is a lot like killing two dreadnoughts. But wait! A bolter CAN hurt a Riptide. It just has a 1.2% chance of doing so. The Tau thank you for wasting your fire. Personally, I'd rather have the riptide so fools who believe in the heart of the dice can waste their firepower.

". A TAC army can murder scatbikes"

Let me know how that works out for you, unless you are playing the world's derpiest Eldar player.

morgoth wrote:
You can't expect to be taken seriously after whining so much about the Eldar and not dropping a single word about Space Marines, Necrons, Tau, Chaos...

please read the entire (unedited) thread.

 DarkStarSabre wrote:
Tau - welcome to more undercosted units in another undercosted Codex.

and you sir. . . undercosted? they are one dimensional - find a way to survive their shooting (which can be difficult, I admit) and the army falls apart.

Martel732 wrote:
Bolters can't kill dreadnoughts either. Are dreadnoughts now OP? Killing an IK is a lot like killing two dreadnoughts. But wait! A bolter CAN hurt a Riptide. It just has a 1.2% chance of doing so. The Tau thank you for wasting your fire. Personally, I'd rather have the riptide so fools who believe in the heart of the dice can waste their firepower.

A bolter actually has the same hideously unlikely chance to kill a dreadnought; from behind. A riptide? Can be killed from any direction.

GMC's and Superheavy's belong in games of 2000+ points. I would argue that should go for all LoW's too. I don't care if one faction had one of these that's undercosted compared to others, the fact remains that you can squeeze multiple of these models into 1000 point armies and be "legal" in doing so. Obviously, there are gaming groups that shun that kind of cheese or whatnot but this isn't always the case. Apoc is where those guys should have stayed but I sincerely hope that GW puts a points threshold that limits their usage somehow.

No, bolters harm AV 10 at a rate of 11.1% per shot. That's an order of magnitude better, actually.

My contention is that with 1.2% wound clearance, bolters can't kill Riptides, either. It's only theoretically possible.

" and the army falls apart. "

Except Riptides and Stormsurges are pretty good in CC.

I hate being quoted.
If someone's going to quote me, quote the whole section.
Don't cut it off at a point in which it changes the context of my point.

My main point being that for a full shooting knight it's floating around 500 points.
For this any army can run units or a unit that far out does the knight for both shooting and it's ability to survive.

Also, this whole thing about GMCs and super heavies all being OP is complete bollocks (excuse the language) but it is.
A few are excessive, yes, but nowhere near all of them.

The imperial knight has access to strength D through a CC weapon, no ranged atall.
If like some people have said, it's kitted out for shooting, you lose that too.

So in regards to shooting your getting: 2 battle cannon shots that must target the same unit, a thermal cannon or avenger cannon, a skyfire autocannon system or an ironically poor missile system (either of them)

So for 500 points no army is able to match that damage?
I'm sorry, but even in a casual game thats far from devastating shooting lol.



On a side note, my tyranid GMCs take exception to being classed as OP lol.
No strength D atall, at most it's a barrage of S10 moderate AP shooting.
Hardly resilient to incoming fire either.
All for the small cost of........ ignore that, nothing is close to being points effective lol.
My hierophant and harridan act as book ends on a shelf.

Most FW stuff is really only worth it for the beauty of the models

And that includes Revenant Titans, which before the D-nerf were considered really good.

But the Knight's potency in combat is considerable without the Chainsword, simply because of Stomp.

I had good fortune during an Apocaylpse game (I know, totally different scale, but just used as an example). I got my full three Stomps off. I was able to 'walk' them up the table, and boot a Predator that was previously hiding in cover.

So if a Knight can make combat early on, say with a unit that can't reliably damage it, or do enough at once to worry the Knight, it can still have a say on the battle, after a fashion.

So whilst not especially difficult to take down, it's a Knight's flexibility that makes it overwhelming for some.

"So whilst not especially difficult to take down, it's a Knight's flexibility that makes it overwhelming for some."

I disagree. There's nothing overwhelming about a knight at all. And that's coming from one of the poorest armies in the game. It's so expensive for how durable it is. Or isn't.

Jackal, excuse me for not quoting you, but the wording for (the damage portion of) stomp and StrD are identical, no? It is why the Crusader, with its lack of a strD weapon was acceptable. . . and then it gets its Str10 AP2 attacks and then stomps anyway?

Riptides I'll grant you should arguably be worse in CC. If the original intent of the Riptide was to make a scaled up Crisis suit, then more power to them, but there would have been no justification for Hammer of Wrath or Smash

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
But the Knight's potency in combat is considerable without the Chainsword, simply because of Stomp.

The stomp is awesome but that's not everything.

In a normal 40K game, the Knight is extremely dangerous because of its ability to implode at strength D in your face.

In an Apocalypse game, the Knight is a true Titan slayer, dealing massive damage with a reasonable number of attacks, especially when compared to a Titan which generally has 2 or 3 clumsy attacks.

Plus, being a superheavy, it doesn't get stomped


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 carldooley wrote:
Jackal, excuse me for not quoting you, but the wording for (the damage portion of) stomp and StrD are identical, no? It is why the Crusader, with its lack of a strD weapon was acceptable. . . and then it gets its Str10 AP2 attacks and then stomps anyway?

Riptides I'll grant you should arguably be worse in CC. If the original intent of the Riptide was to make a scaled up Crisis suit, then more power to them, but there would have been no justification for Hammer of Wrath or Smash

S10AP2 is garbage compared to strength D if the target has multiple HP.

The only thing that is comparable is that stomp 6 deletes models, whereas Strength D deals a 6+D6 no saves no FnP.

It can still be Look-out-Sir'd, whereas the stomp cannot be.

Stomp is also done at initiative 1 however.
Meaning fists and the like also go at the same time.

So it's nowhere near the same as a strength D chainsword would be.


Don't get me wrong, it's still bloody good.
But killing a unit and losing the knight at the same time, not so good.

As I said, I'm by no means saying knights are bad, because they aren't.
But they essentially get what they pay for, no more, no less.

I'd say you can play one in a 1500pt list no problem, my standard 1500pt Marine list has 3 StormTalons with Skyhammer Missiles in it. That's one dead Knight

So yeah, we boil down to opinion.

It is OK to field an Imperial Knight according to the rules. Period.

Now, a whole different topic is if you are lobbying for changes in 8th edition.
So big bad heavies meant for the larger more epic battles? Sure, if we can all agree it should be a squad based game like Bolt Action.

This trend in "getting opponent's permission" is only for models that fall outside of allowable choices.
Imperial Knights are not one of them.
I am not obligated to clear my valid army list with my opponent.
But what can rightly be said: my opponent is not obligated to play me but it sure seems petty to refuse.

I'd get laughed out of the room for not granting "permission" on a legal choice.

Who wouldn't really?

"Can you show me where, on the Imperial Knight, that the Eldar player touched you?"

It's OK to use an Imperial Knight - when it "fits".

Your mileage almost certainly WILL vary from mine.

My start point is small games - say - 800/1000 points. Unless it's a special scenario, I wouldn't expect to see any heavy hitters in a list.

I think of this points zone as recon or skirmish patrol. Go out and find the enemy. Be tough enough to handle something a little stronger, but know when to report back too..... I'm not expecting a named character to lead a patrol, nor to find him riding in a Baneblade.... without listing ALL exclusions - I hope you can see what I'm getting at.

As long as your opponent knows you're taking it, they hopefully have a chance to adapt. It's lame when you're taking a 500 point list and your opponent brings something that an otherwise TAC list could hardly touch.

 Rolsheen wrote:
I'd say you can play one in a 1500pt list no problem, my standard 1500pt Marine list has 3 StormTalons with Skyhammer Missiles in it. That's one dead Knight

Or just have drop pod melta. Strength 8 in melta range vs AV12...

JamesWright83 wrote:
I currently have 1000 points of Grey knights (Librarian, three squads of Terminators and a Dreadknight). I'm doing really well with them, but like the idea of adding in an Imperial Knight Crusader for some long range firepower, something the Grey Knights really lack - plus the model looks really cool.

At what points cost is having a Knight ally acceptable? Adding him to my 1000 points to make a 1500 point army, or wait until I have 1500 and add him to make it 2000?

I don't play competitively, and enjoy casual games with a large group of semi-regular opponents, and certainly don't want to put people off playing me or make them think I'm being cheesy.

Any advice would be great! Thanks

You are playing grey knights, feel free to field a knight. All of you units will be very potent, BUT you will only have 3-4 of them, so I think there are quite a few reasonable answers to your army. Tougher on nids and DE and orks, but you know your friends units and what they like.

morgoth wrote:

 DarkStarSabre wrote:

Eldar have Wraithknights - which are horrendously undercosted, are horrendously more resilient than any other GC in the game with the exception of the Nurgle Daemon Lord and come in an army that has an abundance of units that are undercosted. In fact, the 'bad' units in the Eldar codex...aren't really that bad at all. They're simply 'average'. Which in a Codex full of undercosted wonders makes them bad.

You can't expect to be taken seriously after whining so much about the Eldar and not dropping a single word about Space Marines, Necrons, Tau, Chaos...

Everyone who actually plays this game knows that some Eldar units are incredibly sucky at everything, and that most of them are just average.

Take the Ranger: there isn't a single sniper in the game which isn't vastly better for the point cost - and snipers generally suck in this game.
How is that not a bad unit?


The one thing which could be considered immensely wrong in this whole IK in the context of balance discussion, is that the SuperFriends, who always have one solid combo and oftentimes game-breaking ones (ITC banning Electro-Displacement case in point), also get access to the IK.
Which doesn't matter, since the IK is not really overpowered and is thus never included in a competitive army more or less.

Cute. Real cute.

Yes, let's look at the Ranger. Oh no, it;s not better than every other sniper unit in the game. We're going to ignore the fact that there is zero requirement to take them in your meta-detachment and if using a CAD you also have access to scatbikes and DAs. Rangers are bad in the fact that other units in their codex do similar jobs better.

And that's the case of the Eldar. You have a handful of 'mediocre' units while most armies have a handful of 'good' units. Are you seriously trying to tell me that Scatbikes, Warp Spiders and WKs are not horrendously undercosted for what they are doing? Let's add in your FW options too.

Now here's the fun part.

Go look at the LVO Eldar armies.

They're all the fething same. Every. fething. Single. One. Same guilty units for the simple reason that they are undercosted and overperform. If that's not a red flag concerning those units I don't know what is. And it's not as though Eldar are lacking for options in what they can and cannot run. It's not like you're suffering for choice really.

But it's ok, Keep up your meme.

And let's look at the others.

SM - are remarkably bland. Gladius is annoying, yes. But the problem with SM is...Grav. The fact that almost everything is taken min-max to squeeze in as much Grav as possible. And that's a problem with a weapon type. If Grav was suddenly dropped to AP - that wounded on the save value it'd be trash. And holy crap would it nuke three quarters of the Marine armies out there. You wonder why you don't see so many Starcannons in Eldar armies anymore? Because they gutted them in 4th edition.

Tau - already mentioned, thanks. Personally, I find that Tau and Eldar are the armies that exacerbate the MC/GC issues. Riptides, WKs, Stormsurges. Those are your culprits. Ultimately the problem was whatever designer thought Wraith Constructs and Tau suits needed to be treated as organic entities rather than vehicles.

Hell, Chaos have a stronger claim for it being thematically feasible for Daemon Engines to be MCs and GCs than Tau suits do. But unfortunately it's a case of one army design philosophy versus the other. Are MCs and GCs strong? Yes, yes they are.

But the strongest MCs and GCs that you will encounter in any sort of frequency are...in Tau and Eldar armies. So, strong armies which are getting the advantage of undercosted units with strong unit type rules. Huh.

NERF MCS AND GCS!

No. Because at that point you literally gak on other armies that had MCs and GCs as their thing - which they really don't so much anymore because theirs are hideously expensive, need babysitting and don't have anywhere near the same damage output as the new ones that have cropped up.

Saying Tau are fine because they're weak in CC is a joke. First, you have to survive Overwatch from multiple sources at increased BS - with high strength weapons to boot. Fun fun. Then you have to realise that MCs and GCs are still relatively good in assaults.

Really, those two armies are clusterfucks in terms of balance on their own.

Hey, let's look at Chaos for you. Sure.

You seriously going to argue that CSM are CHEESE, OP, NERF NERF just because they finally got a supplement that brought them sort-of on par to SM after an entire edition and 3/4s? Want to whine about the OP Daemon Prince gimmicks? Sure. It's literally a gimmick for a handful of Legions.

But Death Guard get FNP and Relentless! Nerf! Nerf! Welp, I suppose that's upsetting for you when you consider that we're literally paying points for it and getting an Initiative drop to boot. Oh, and we can't dip into Be'lakor...and hilariously can't take Typhus' Plague Zombies ( Typhus states the Cultists cannot have any upgrades but the Legion rules state they MUST have the Mark of Nurgle where possible - which is an upgrade.)

We have first turn charges from World Eaters. If you roll the right dice. But wait, it's an assault from...Marine equivalents. Okay. Maybe it's only right for this sort of thing to actually be happening?

But seriously, nice Eldar Ranger meme.

The Eldar Ranger is not a blanket defense or excuse for Scatbikes and WKs. Seriously.

Rangers 60pts TROOPS
Ancient Doom, Battle Focus, Fleet, Infiltrate, Move Through Cover, Shrouded
4 4 3 3 1 5 1 8 5+
Rifle 36" SX ap6 Heavy1 Sniper
Shuriken Pistol 12" S4 ap5 Bladestorm, Pistol

Wolf Scouts 70pts ELITES
Accute Senses, ATSKNF, Counter Attack, Move Through Cover, Infiltrate, Scout
4 4 4 4 4 1 8 4+
Assault Grenades 8" S3 ap- assault1, blast
Boltgun 24" S4 ap5 rapidfire
Bolt Pistol 12" S4 ap5 Pistol
Krak Grenades 8" S6 ap4 assault1
For an extra 1ppm we can swap the Boltguns for Sniper Rifles.
For an extra 2ppm we can give them a +1 to their cover save.

Yeah, I think there's worse Scouts than Rangers.

If you can kill 3 Predators you can kill an Imperial Knight. Simple as that.

Main difference is that in most situations the Knight will run at you, though that might be beneficial to you...

SM - are remarkably bland. Gladius is annoying, yes. But the problem with SM is...Grav. The fact that almost everything is taken min-max to squeeze in as much Grav as possible. And that's a problem with a weapon type. If Grav was suddenly dropped to AP - that wounded on the save value it'd be trash. And holy crap would it nuke three quarters of the Marine armies out there. You wonder why you don't see so many Starcannons in Eldar armies anymore? Because they gutted them in 4th edition.

I'd argue the biggest reason for why we see grav-spam from Marines is something you also address later in your post. MCs. you see grav because they're a solid anti-MC weapon in a meta that's dripping with them.

BrianDavion wrote:

SM - are remarkably bland. Gladius is annoying, yes. But the problem with SM is...Grav. The fact that almost everything is taken min-max to squeeze in as much Grav as possible. And that's a problem with a weapon type. If Grav was suddenly dropped to AP - that wounded on the save value it'd be trash. And holy crap would it nuke three quarters of the Marine armies out there. You wonder why you don't see so many Starcannons in Eldar armies anymore? Because they gutted them in 4th edition.

I'd argue the biggest reason for why we see grav-spam from Marines is something you also address later in your post. MCs. you see grav because they're a solid anti-MC weapon in a meta that's dripping with them.

No, we see so much grav because it is a solide anti-everything weapon.

Jorim wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

SM - are remarkably bland. Gladius is annoying, yes. But the problem with SM is...Grav. The fact that almost everything is taken min-max to squeeze in as much Grav as possible. And that's a problem with a weapon type. If Grav was suddenly dropped to AP - that wounded on the save value it'd be trash. And holy crap would it nuke three quarters of the Marine armies out there. You wonder why you don't see so many Starcannons in Eldar armies anymore? Because they gutted them in 4th edition.

I'd argue the biggest reason for why we see grav-spam from Marines is something you also address later in your post. MCs. you see grav because they're a solid anti-MC weapon in a meta that's dripping with them.

No, we see so much grav because it is a solide anti-everything weapon.

This. the only thing grav really falls down against is low armour hordes.

Wait, you're running an army with bolters as basic weapons. That solves that problem.

The problem's not so much Marines as it is Grav.

Grav is just too good an all rounder.

Kills bikes. Kills MEQ. Kills TEQ. Kills GC. Kills MC. Kills armour.

It's the Starcannon of 6th edition onwards.

Well, this brought up something from yesterday.

I was over at Gene's and he was talking about a game he had had with Timmy. Now Gene has only got 1.2K's worth of his Genestealer cult, and his sole big hitter is a Leman Russ.
Timmy wanted a 1750 game. "Thats okay" he said "You can recycle units". Everything was fine according to Gene, but then he mentioned one thing that made me pause.
Timmy had brought his new knight.
Honestly I am glad Timmy was not there or I think I would have floored him. As it was the only thing that stopped it being a white wash was Gene's Cult Ambush rules allowing most of his units to skip the first two thirds/three quarters of the board and get close fast, denying Timmy objectives and ultimately allowing him to scrape a draw.

I brought mine in 3000> games. Nobody complains about anything at that level.

 DarkStarSabre wrote:

Grav is just too good an all rounder.

Kills bikes. Kills MEQ. Kills TEQ. Kills GC. Kills MC. Kills armour.

This. It is not just too good in general, it ruins the internal balance of the codex. Most marine heavy and special weapons used to have their uses, but now there is little reason to take anything except the grav. Marines are my main army and I despise grav.

Grav is necessary because WK and Riptide are basically immune to other Imperial heavy weapons in the quantities you can field them. For example, it's around 40 BS 4 lascannon shots to kill Riptide.