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.

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, I think IK's go down too early in this edition.
Lascannons are similarly effective weapons are everywhere.
I played with my BA against AdMech recently.
My Shadowsword downed his IK in the first 2 rounds with ease.
Moreover, the damage output of an IK seems to be not the best.
Although he is rather effective in cc with his titanic feet.

I keep saying that Lascannons are far too strong and they need some kind of balance applied.

Human body + Power Armor + Lascannon Kills literally everything, always and for so cheap. 4 devastators can just wreck a baneblade or a knight. It's not well balanced to the fluff.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Imateria wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:
This feels like a perception issue. If people had been taking lascannons in 7th instead of all assault cannons then IKs would have been visibly weaker back then, too.

And there doesn't seem be anything from stopping a Stygies/Lucius IK from deep striking via CP? You can even canticle them, give them a 5++ vs mortal wonuds, or +1 to invulnerable.

...of course that requires a proper detachment instead of a single knight.

Otherwise people are going to be reluctant to take such a big model when lost of points are consumed by hefty characters to provide rerolls.

I take it you never played in 7th then, Lascannons weren't taken because they were rubbish at their job, just like almost every other dedicated anti-tank weapon. If you wanted to drop a Knight, you either went Melta, Grav, Haywire or D.

I saw millions of Lascannons in 7th. I got wrecked by them twice at 2017 LVO.

Single lascannons are fine, but they are too common. In armies like Primaris or Death Guard they are fine, but they should be very rare weapons because too many are just too frustrating. With melta you have to get close, so there is a risk there. Lascannons are just easy.

Lascannons are a big part of the problem. They are just too good and too cheap. They kill everything.

Lascannons have amazing reach, high strength, great damage and come on a variety of units. They are waaay under-costed. last edition, the Lascannon had a longer range and better strength than most other basic imperial heavy weapons but it paid for that by being the most expensive basic heavy weapon.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
T9 is an insane durability increase. If that happens, I'd hope Baneblades get T9 too, because they're categorically worse than Knights at combat and in mobility, while being better at shooting and roughly equivalent in durability.

If Knights suddenly got such a drastic durability increase I'd hope Baneblades did too or the superheavy meta will get shifted all out of whack.

FWIW the average cost of an upgraded Baneblade is 555, so right on the money almost

T10 fellblade, I would hope that too.

 sfshilo wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
I played mine 2 times and then placed it on the shelf, they are just to weak atm, this might change when they get a proper codex tho.

That was Mechanicus, they just got a codex.

Hence why i said a "proper codex" . You shouldnt have to take AM HQ's to get stratagems for knights.

Knights are really best when taken with AdMech. You can spend CP for Canticles, +1 invul, or operating at full strength for a turn. It vastly increased their viability as a whole. Also the healing. You can get a 2 wounds a turn heal plus another 2 for CP if needed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Red_Five wrote:
Lascannons are a big part of the problem. They are just too good and too cheap. They kill everything.

Lascannons have amazing reach, high strength, great damage and come on a variety of units. They are waaay under-costed. last edition, the Lascannon had a longer range and better strength than most other basic imperial heavy weapons but it paid for that by being the most expensive basic heavy weapon.

Lascannons generally do what they are supposed to. Hit a single model potentially hard. D6 damage still makes their damage unreliable and they are impractical against low point models.

 Togusa wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, I think IK's go down too early in this edition.
Lascannons are similarly effective weapons are everywhere.
I played with my BA against AdMech recently.
My Shadowsword downed his IK in the first 2 rounds with ease.
Moreover, the damage output of an IK seems to be not the best.
Although he is rather effective in cc with his titanic feet.

I keep saying that Lascannons are far too strong and they need some kind of balance applied.

Human body + Power Armor + Lascannon Kills literally everything, always and for so cheap. 4 devastators can just wreck a baneblade or a knight. It's not well balanced to the fluff.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Imateria wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:
This feels like a perception issue. If people had been taking lascannons in 7th instead of all assault cannons then IKs would have been visibly weaker back then, too.

And there doesn't seem be anything from stopping a Stygies/Lucius IK from deep striking via CP? You can even canticle them, give them a 5++ vs mortal wonuds, or +1 to invulnerable.

...of course that requires a proper detachment instead of a single knight.

Otherwise people are going to be reluctant to take such a big model when lost of points are consumed by hefty characters to provide rerolls.

I take it you never played in 7th then, Lascannons weren't taken because they were rubbish at their job, just like almost every other dedicated anti-tank weapon. If you wanted to drop a Knight, you either went Melta, Grav, Haywire or D.

I saw millions of Lascannons in 7th. I got wrecked by them twice at 2017 LVO.

I sincerely doubt Lascannons wrecked you twice at a competitive event in 7th.

I run my Atropos with the ion shield strat basically always turned on... puts him at 3++ vs ranged attacks, so there's that... i went ateopos precisely for this reason - no other knight seems to offer enough resistance.

grouchoben wrote:
I run my Atropos with the ion shield strat basically always turned on. puts him at 3++ vs ranged attacks, so there's that... i went ateopos precisely for this reason - no other knight seems to offer enough resistance.

Err.. How so? Afaik cerastud knights cannot use admech stratagems due to lack of questor mechanicum keyword.

I own three cerastus and that has bothered me since

Has anyone experienced cerastus knights ingame? I'm still building mine. They should be a tad tougher to bring down in comparison to normal knights.

 Karhedron wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

Wraithknights can receive buffs & synergize with the rest of Eldar.

Call me when Imperial Knights can receive Guide, Fortune, etc.

They can be buffed by AdMech characters and particularly Bobby G (who is in practically every Imperial tournement army it seems.

If Buffs are that good they should be built into the cost of the buffing model, bit the recipient. Otherwise you just end up with an overcosted army. The fact that a WK might received buffs from the rest of the army does not justify a higher price tag. IKs are overpriced in this edition and WKs are overpriced compared to IKs.

Difference is that someone who owns a WK will typically have a Craftworld army to use it with. This is not the case for the IK. Sure, they can be buffed by Girlyman and AdMech stratagems, but many people who have Knights don't play Ultrasmurfs or AdMech, leaving Imperial Knights weaker overall (I myself for example play Space Wolves and Death Guard for Knight- eligible armies). But I agree though, the cost of buffs should be incorporated in the cost for whatever model hands them out, not the models that receive them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 sfshilo wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
I played mine 2 times and then placed it on the shelf, they are just to weak atm, this might change when they get a proper codex tho.

That was Mechanicus, they just got a codex.

Hence why i said a "proper codex" . You shouldnt have to take AM HQ's to get stratagems for knights.

Hum, I could take a Space Wolf Iron Priest and count him as a Techpriest Dominus for rules purposes... then find two other models to use as Enginseers and make a cheap Supreme Command detachment out of it

Pandabeer wrote:
But I agree though, the cost of buffs should be incorporated in the cost for whatever model hands them out, not the models that receive them.

Problem with that being buffing unit X is not as good as buffing unit Y. If you price them for buffing knights they can end up overpriced with unit B.

Buffers are def one of the trickier units to balance out.

 Togusa wrote:

 Imateria wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:
This feels like a perception issue. If people had been taking lascannons in 7th instead of all assault cannons then IKs would have been visibly weaker back then, too.

And there doesn't seem be anything from stopping a Stygies/Lucius IK from deep striking via CP? You can even canticle them, give them a 5++ vs mortal wonuds, or +1 to invulnerable.

...of course that requires a proper detachment instead of a single knight.

Otherwise people are going to be reluctant to take such a big model when lost of points are consumed by hefty characters to provide rerolls.

I take it you never played in 7th then, Lascannons weren't taken because they were rubbish at their job, just like almost every other dedicated anti-tank weapon. If you wanted to drop a Knight, you either went Melta, Grav, Haywire or D.

I saw millions of Lascannons in 7th. I got wrecked by them twice at 2017 LVO.

No offence but your list must have been terrible then. The top tables were all about Tau super suits, Imperial Death Stars, massed Renegades Artilery and Eldar, not much in the way of Lascannons there.

They could be T10 with a 2++ invulnerable save, but that wouldn't help them against the many 10 smites a turn lists. And it wouldn't help them capture objectives, which they need to in the newer missions that tournament organizers use.

Knights are not weak, and there are not much anti-tank in the current meta anyway.

Lascannons aren't undercosted. Everything else is absurdly overcosted.

If lascannons suddenly stopped existing, no one would use grav weaponry, or heavy bolters, because they're trash.

Lascannons are worth using after 7 editions, in their JOB, they are like the BEST anti-armour weapon (Without entering on artillery/titan weapons), and now people say they are underpriced?

You know whats underpriced? Plasma (Rifles. Pistols and Cannons are actually ok). Plasma is at last usefull after editions of just being useless compared with Grav. But Plasma is TOO usefull, probably nearly every plasma weapon could get a slighly price increase, depending of the one that is using that plasma-weapon.
And I say this playing Dark Angels. 80% of my special and heavy weapons are plasma weapons.

25 points for a single shot that usually hits and wounds on 3s is totally fair, SM have some undercosted units/wargear, but the lascannon is not one of them.

Morkphoiz wrote:

grouchoben wrote:
I run my Atropos with the ion shield strat basically always turned on. puts him at 3++ vs ranged attacks, so there's that... i went ateopos precisely for this reason - no other knight seems to offer enough resistance.

Err.. How so? Afaik cerastud knights cannot use admech stratagems due to lack of questor mechanicum keyword.

I own three cerastus and that has bothered me since

Has anyone experienced cerastus knights ingame? I'm still building mine. They should be a tad tougher to bring down in comparison to normal knights.

The rotate ion shields strat is Questor Mechanicus, not admech, check it out. the other require an admech HQ...

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
My index is packed away right now, but isn't the battle cannon of the knight kind of nerfed now that the Leman Russ cannon can fire twice too? Not sure if it has the same profile.

The Battle Cannon of the Knight is the same as it always was. Not sure why another unit getting buffed counts as a nerf to a unit in a completely different army, unless you're directly comparing relative strengths, in which case a Knight tears an LRBT in half.

Like I said, I don't have my index with me, but what is the cost/stats for a knight battlecannon compared to cost of LR battlecannon? They both basically fire twice now so should have equal points more or less.

 bullyboy wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:
My index is packed away right now, but isn't the battle cannon of the knight kind of nerfed now that the Leman Russ cannon can fire twice too? Not sure if it has the same profile.

The Battle Cannon of the Knight is the same as it always was. Not sure why another unit getting buffed counts as a nerf to a unit in a completely different army, unless you're directly comparing relative strengths, in which case a Knight tears an LRBT in half.

Like I said, I don't have my index with me, but what is the cost/stats for a knight battlecannon compared to cost of LR battlecannon? They both basically fire twice now so should have equal points more or less.

That wouldn't be a weapon cost, as Grinding Advance is not a weapon rule. It would be a platform rule, since it affects all turret guns and not just the battle cannon.

I like that IKs, WKs, Riptides, etc aren't in every match.

I'm a little worried that Gilly, Morty, and Maggy are going to be in every match. But it's better than knowing it's 'da big guyz.

I can't begrudge people Gilli, Morty, and Maggy, because they're pretty neat. A lot of why people buy, paint, and play them is because they're cool. Much like how I bought, painted, and played with Baneblades back when they were awful but I thought they were cool.

Something being 'really good' is not, by itself, a reason for most people to play them (I believe).

Have been wrong before though.

Oh, I'd love to see a nicely built/assembled one. I'd love to see one in a game sometime. Much like how I loved seeing the really amazingly painted IKs someone brought to our FLGS.

I'd just rather most games revolved around the more basic units (with the more exotic there to shore up/support, not dictate the whole battle).

Having that while also having Knights and Gilly/Morty/Maggy fit in, too, is a pipe dream. But it's my pipe dream.

 Togusa wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, I think IK's go down too early in this edition.
Lascannons are similarly effective weapons are everywhere.
I played with my BA against AdMech recently.
My Shadowsword downed his IK in the first 2 rounds with ease.
Moreover, the damage output of an IK seems to be not the best.
Although he is rather effective in cc with his titanic feet.

I keep saying that Lascannons are far too strong and they need some kind of balance applied.

Human body + Power Armor + Lascannon Kills literally everything, always and for so cheap. 4 devastators can just wreck a baneblade or a knight. It's not well balanced to the fluff.

Come on, in 8th edition my 4 Lascannon Devastator Squad never done their work in killing a single Rhino in time before that rhino unloaded those charges it carried, even under the buff of a Chapter Master. I admit that I always have a reputation of rolling poor dices, but then I done the math and it shows that even with reroll to all missed hit and using up that flying baby, it do only pick off 9 wounds from a Rhino on average rolling. Against IK, costs around 7 wounds on you, not even close to bring you down a category of stateline.
Of course, if your opponent are super lucky, and you are below average in luck, 4 Lascannon devastator can kill an IK, but that would be like 1/10 chances.

grouchoben wrote:

Morkphoiz wrote:

grouchoben wrote:
I run my Atropos with the ion shield strat basically always turned on. puts him at 3++ vs ranged attacks, so there's that... i went ateopos precisely for this reason - no other knight seems to offer enough resistance.

Err.. How so? Afaik cerastud knights cannot use admech stratagems due to lack of questor mechanicum keyword.

I own three cerastus and that has bothered me since

Has anyone experienced cerastus knights ingame? I'm still building mine. They should be a tad tougher to bring down in comparison to normal knights.

The rotate ion shields strat is Questor Mechanicus, not admech, check it out. the other require an admech HQ...

Everything about this is wrong. You need an Ad Mech detachment to access any of their stratagems, and if something doesn't have the QUESTOR MECHANICUS keyword you can't use the stratagem on it.

 Corrode wrote:

grouchoben wrote:

Morkphoiz wrote:

grouchoben wrote:
I run my Atropos with the ion shield strat basically always turned on. puts him at 3++ vs ranged attacks, so there's that... i went ateopos precisely for this reason - no other knight seems to offer enough resistance.

Err.. How so? Afaik cerastud knights cannot use admech stratagems due to lack of questor mechanicum keyword.

I own three cerastus and that has bothered me since

Has anyone experienced cerastus knights ingame? I'm still building mine. They should be a tad tougher to bring down in comparison to normal knights.

The rotate ion shields strat is Questor Mechanicus, not admech, check it out. the other require an admech HQ...

Everything about this is wrong. You need an Ad Mech detachment to access any of their stratagems, and if something doesn't have the QUESTOR MECHANICUS keyword you can't use the stratagem on it.

You can have an Admech / Questor Mechanicus detachment with Knights in it and nothing else, surely?

I've played a half dozen 8E games with 2K Imperial Knights.

I had to concentrate the fire power of all 4 knights to bring anything down in the shooting phase. I quickly realised the best way to get things done was to charge, partly to keep them from shooting and to get into range to stomp.

I was hoping the AdMech codex would add back Seneshals, relics, and useful strategems, but it did not. So no way to improve them and nothing useful to spend CP on.

Gw was smart. They sold a huge unit everyone would want and then after sold a weapon that can destroy them. They're like a movie villain creating a virus to sell the cure. XD

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Corrode wrote:

grouchoben wrote:

Morkphoiz wrote:

grouchoben wrote:
I run my Atropos with the ion shield strat basically always turned on. puts him at 3++ vs ranged attacks, so there's that... i went ateopos precisely for this reason - no other knight seems to offer enough resistance.

Err.. How so? Afaik cerastud knights cannot use admech stratagems due to lack of questor mechanicum keyword.

I own three cerastus and that has bothered me since

Has anyone experienced cerastus knights ingame? I'm still building mine. They should be a tad tougher to bring down in comparison to normal knights.

The rotate ion shields strat is Questor Mechanicus, not admech, check it out. the other require an admech HQ...

Everything about this is wrong. You need an Ad Mech detachment to access any of their stratagems, and if something doesn't have the QUESTOR MECHANICUS keyword you can't use the stratagem on it.

You can have an Admech / Questor Mechanicus detachment with Knights in it and nothing else, surely?

No. The stratagems page says you have to have a battleforged ADEPTUS MECHANICUS detachment, and Knights don't have ADEPTUS MECHANICUS as a keyword, they have QUESTOR MECHANICUS. If you have no detachments with AM-keyworded stuff, you have no access to their stratagems.

Additionally, the specific stratagem he's talking about can only be used on stuff with the QUESTOR MECHANICUS keyword, and Cerastus (iirc) don't have it.