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.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

changemod wrote:

 Stus67 wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 BrookM wrote:
Right, the Knight Lance was just clarified again: You must have three big Knights to get your CP's.

So...what purpose do Armigers serve? Because right now they seem pretty pointless.

For shooting stuff your knights are better off not shooting at, and to fill up remaining points. Armigers were never meant to be center pieces.

Not meant to be centrepieces =/= doesn’t contribute as functional “troops”.

Bingo. I was hoping for ways to be able to run LOTS of Knights in a functional army. Because that is what I want to have. KNIGHTS. Not a ton of frickin' Guard.

It’s actually completely against the philosophy of command points: CP are to reward you for taking troops instead of going all-in on big flashy things. You’d think the equivalent design space here would be to encourage people to take the chaff knights instead of going all-in on huge minor titans.

Justyn wrote:
Way to force us to ally in guard GW.

Said every Imperium army ever

changemod wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

changemod wrote:

 Stus67 wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 BrookM wrote:
Right, the Knight Lance was just clarified again: You must have three big Knights to get your CP's.

So...what purpose do Armigers serve? Because right now they seem pretty pointless.

For shooting stuff your knights are better off not shooting at, and to fill up remaining points. Armigers were never meant to be center pieces.

Not meant to be centrepieces =/= doesn’t contribute as functional “troops”.

Bingo. I was hoping for ways to be able to run LOTS of Knights in a functional army. Because that is what I want to have. KNIGHTS. Not a ton of frickin' Guard.

It’s actually completely against the philosophy of command points: CP are to reward you for taking troops instead of going all-in on big flashy things. You’d think the equivalent design space here would be to encourage people to take the chaff knights instead of going all-in on huge minor titans.

This

The whole argument of CP being backwards and meant as a way to incetivize taking troops would be a lot more valid if troop hordes weren't, by almost every standard, even more powerful than an average army, let alone and incredibly elite one.

 Cephalobeard wrote:
The whole argument of CP being backwards and meant as a way to incetivize taking troops would be a lot more valid if troop hordes weren't, by almost every standard, even more powerful than an average army, let alone and incredibly elite one.

Oh absolutely, but I don’t think they -intended- to make individually worthless chaff infantry overpowered by raw weight of numbers.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

gungo wrote:
You also can’t make your knight a warlord unless it’s a character. So 3 knights in a superheavy detachment and 6 armigers in another 2 SH detachments. If that doesn’t work then you effectively killed knight armies.

I wonder if that includes Canis Rex, since he is already a character. He was going to be my Warlord in my Ad Mech/Knights army.

well he has a warlord trait so he’s good. You just can’t choose your trait such as he invul one.

Said every Imperium army ever

And hence the arguments that guard are OP. Well if their goal was to get me to purchase less Knights, Goal accomplished.

But chicks dig giant robots

If armigers dont let you get CP that saves me money and im glad i didnt get forgebane!

changemod wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

changemod wrote:

 Stus67 wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

 BrookM wrote:
Right, the Knight Lance was just clarified again: You must have three big Knights to get your CP's.

So...what purpose do Armigers serve? Because right now they seem pretty pointless.

For shooting stuff your knights are better off not shooting at, and to fill up remaining points. Armigers were never meant to be center pieces.

Not meant to be centrepieces =/= doesn’t contribute as functional “troops”.

Bingo. I was hoping for ways to be able to run LOTS of Knights in a functional army. Because that is what I want to have. KNIGHTS. Not a ton of frickin' Guard.

It’s actually completely against the philosophy of command points: CP are to reward you for taking troops instead of going all-in on big flashy things. You’d think the equivalent design space here would be to encourage people to take the chaff knights instead of going all-in on huge minor titans.

I do want to run big Knights too. I had already planned on running three big Knights in my Knight army.

I was planning on a dominus, two questoris and three armigers, with the dominus and one knight with an armiger and the last knight with the two other armigers, but now i might just run four Questoris Knights instead, or 3/4 Cerastus and a Questoris depending on points. (Hopefully they let me run 4 Cerastus in 2000 in the next CA...)

I do want to run big Knights too. I had already planned on running three big Knights in my Knight army.

My plan was one Dominus, as many Normal IK as possible, and Armigers to fill in the gaps so that I had two Superheavy Detachments for a total of 9CP. Now I don't need Armigers at all. 5 Knights and some guard. If I can spare 360pts for two guard battalions so much the better.

Is this confirmed or all rumors because it seems like requiring ONE big knight to get warlord and cp makes sense not requiring 3 of the same thing (spam much gw? Thought you wanted to end that)

So doesent this make it impossible to have more than one character and relic in a pure knights army 2k pts or lower

So doesent this make it impossible to have more than one character and relic in a pure knights army 2k pts or lower

Yes unless the special character has an exception. Then its him and one more. Well you can spend CP to get more relics.

Justyn wrote:

So doesent this make it impossible to have more than one character and relic in a pure knights army 2k pts or lower

Yes unless the special character has an exception. Then its him and one more. Well you can spend CP to get more relics.

Except they need to be a character to take a relic right and the cheapest knight is the gallant and hes 369 pts now i think

Speaking as a SOUP player, I am digging all this. A pure knight army is just too one dimensional. It has always been bad and they nerfed the lance/character rules to make it an impossibility. It would have been nice if armigers gave 1CP a piece and unlocked characters ... but GW gonna GW. I could see a 2 melee armiger plus 1 gallant TERRYN detachment doing some work if you have 2 other battalions to feed them CP. Even a baby knight could do work if it swings twice. And +2" to move and charge, uh yeah, that helps melee knights a lot. This might be enough to get my knights off the shelf and onto the table. TERRYN + STYGIES + BLANGELS, or maybe TERRYN + CADIA + BLANGELS, or perhaps TERRYN can do smash captains job and I can run TERRYN + STYGIES + min-CADIA. Either way, GW is railroading competitive players into running multiple codexies.

EDIT: 3x TERRYN gallants + minBattalion-BLANGEL + minBattalion-CADIA. That would a LOL army. Get ready for some big assault phases. Captain smash dies, swings twice. Spare captain honors the chapter. TERRYN honors the chapter and swings twice. You could spend all 16CP on the first turn to bring the emperors holy wrath.

Justyn wrote:

You also can’t make your knight a warlord unless it’s a character. So 3 knights in a superheavy detachment and 6 armigers in another 2 SH detachments. If that doesn’t work then you effectively killed knight armies.

That nets you 6 total CP. 3 for the first SH detachment and 3 for battleforged. For 180 pts you can get some Guard bubble wrap that give you 5cp.

No I think Guard battalion is better but I’m thinking pure knight armies and how to make it viable. I’m hoping the podcast guys are confused and this army gets all CP but needs a triple knight list to use the strategems.

I was thinking they might not require being a character to get a relic. Mostly because of that asinine requirement to get characters.

Justyn wrote:

I do want to run big Knights too. I had already planned on running three big Knights in my Knight army.

My plan was one Dominus, as many Normal IK as possible, and Armigers to fill in the gaps so that I had two Superheavy Detachments for a total of 9CP. Now I don't need Armigers at all. 5 Knights and some guard. If I can spare 360pts for two guard battalions so much the better.

I don't really see the point of Armigers anymore. Sure, you can run a pair and it will allow you to fill up some points, but if they don't work toward getting you CP, I would rather just run another Knight.

I got dragged away from the stream by family right at the end of the rules section: Has anyone played an autocannon armiger in the battle report yet?

Wait on the long war they said there was a strat that made them warlords

gendoikari87 wrote:
Wait on the long war they said there was a strat that made them warlords

So you can pay more of the CP that you don't have to get the Warlord you should already get?!

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:
Wait on the long war they said there was a strat that made them warlords

So you can pay more of the CP that you don't have to get the Warlord you should already get?!

8 cp is enough for my army to function the way I want to build it if that strat is 2cp or less. So I’m cool at that point. Armigers aren’t useless without cp they’re smaller and that in and of itself is an advantage. Less putting all chickens in one basket

Dominus should be worth 2 big knights :/

gendoikari87 wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:
Wait on the long war they said there was a strat that made them warlords

So you can pay more of the CP that you don't have to get the Warlord you should already get?!

8 cp is enough for my army to function the way I want to build it if that strat is 2cp or less. So I’m cool at that point. Armigers aren’t useless without cp they’re smaller and that in and of itself is an advantage. Less putting all chickens in one basket

As long as Canis Rex remains a character and can be the Warlord regardless of how many other Knights I run (be it that he is a Freeblade, I would place money on him being able to do that since otherwise he wouldn't have a Warlord Trait assigned to him). But the composition of my other Knight Detachment just changed drastically though. A Valiant and two Wardens probably. My Warglaives are probably going away.

My allies for my Ad Mech are probably going to just be two Wardens instead of a Warden and two Armigers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Danit wrote:
Dominus should be worth 2 big knights :/

Or if you do a SH Detachment with three big Knights, you should get bonus CP.

And now I am thinking I might be better served by a Castellan than a Valiant. But HARPOON GUN!

I’m taking the long war podcast as a grain of salt that rule as explained sounds poorly thought out. I can see requireing multiple knights to make one a character with the warlord strat exception. But the SH detachment doesn’t grant CP for armigers or 1 knight 2 armigers units is just so far outside Gw current design and convoluted.
3 knights, 6 armigers 12 cp and a single character warlord is hardly a competitive army.
Or
1 dominus, 2 knights and several armigers.
None of these lists are issues under current 8th edition
It’s also not like any of these units can abuse character targeting rules either. None of it makes sense as explained.

gungo wrote:
I’m taking the long war podcast as a grain of salt that rule as explained sounds poorly thought out. I can see requireing multiple knights to make one a character with the warlord strat exception. But the SH detachment doesn’t grant CP for armigers or 1 knight 2 armigers units is just so far outside Gw current design and convoluted.
3 knights, 6 armigers 12 cp and a single character warlord is hardly a competitive army.
Or
1 dominus, 2 knights and several armigers.
None of these lists are issues under current 8th edition
It’s also not like any of these units can abuse character targeting rules either. None of it makes sense as explained.

unless gw has royally screwed up and made a super abuseable strat or warlord trait or something and refused to remove it. Only way that makes sense

Justyn wrote:

Said every Imperium army ever

And hence the arguments that guard are OP. Well if their goal was to get me to purchase less Knights, Goal accomplished.

Most armies have access to something similar, if not in Codex than via an ally. I actually kind of think the Imperium situation is one of the best designed options for this. Rather than create a cheap troop choice for every possible Imperium army by coming up with things like Scouts or Trainees or something, you create a thematically proper cheap unit for everyone. Moreover, you don't double down on the Scout problem of giving them something that fights for design space with more iconic baseline troops. I mean, if GW spun out Mek's into their own army of expensive robo-Orks, I'd not bat an eye to see them allied with a detachment of Boyz.

Plus throw a stone in the imperium and you’ll hit a guard, just make sure to bring sunscreen when you do