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.

Well, it is not that Castellan absolutely must sit back. If the enemy has no melee units that can realistically threaten a Knight (and many armies don't) then it can freely move closer and use the meltas and stomps too. Valiant on the other hand has to always move close in order to do anything worthwhile.

I like the Valiant. With a pair of Siegebreaker Cannons on the back, it has plenty to do while it trudges up the field. The Conflagration Cannon has an effective range of 28", so it isn't like you won't be using it in most deployments on turn 1. Maybe if your opponent is sitting on their back edge.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
I like the Valiant. With a pair of Siegebreaker Cannons on the back, it has plenty to do while it trudges up the field. The Conflagration Cannon has an effective range of 28", so it isn't like you won't be using it in most deployments on turn 1. Maybe if your opponent is sitting on their back edge.

The problem is with just 22" you probably won't hit anything worthwhile with the harpoon. If your opponent is gunlining with 36"+ range units you may not even get a chance in turn 2.

While I think the flamer is probably the most interesting weapon, I am not sure it carries enough to make up the difference versus the plasma & volcano lance.

Tyel wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
I like the Valiant. With a pair of Siegebreaker Cannons on the back, it has plenty to do while it trudges up the field. The Conflagration Cannon has an effective range of 28", so it isn't like you won't be using it in most deployments on turn 1. Maybe if your opponent is sitting on their back edge.

The problem is with just 22" you probably won't hit anything worthwhile with the harpoon. If your opponent is gunlining with 36"+ range units you may not even get a chance in turn 2.

While I think the flamer is probably the most interesting weapon, I am not sure it carries enough to make up the difference versus the plasma & volcano lance.

A lot of players will be highly considering raven house, so you could add a d6 to all the moves in that case. On a good advance he's now looking at 4" deep of opponent deployment zone with the harpoon and melta, and certainly could reach anything on t2, except for like the very back few inches on hammer and anvil.

Tyel wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
I like the Valiant. With a pair of Siegebreaker Cannons on the back, it has plenty to do while it trudges up the field. The Conflagration Cannon has an effective range of 28", so it isn't like you won't be using it in most deployments on turn 1. Maybe if your opponent is sitting on their back edge.

The problem is with just 22" you probably won't hit anything worthwhile with the harpoon. If your opponent is gunlining with 36"+ range units you may not even get a chance in turn 2.

While I think the flamer is probably the most interesting weapon, I am not sure it carries enough to make up the difference versus the plasma & volcano lance.

The problem with the Volcano Lance is that it is way too swingy. Variable damage blows. Yes, the Conflagration Cannon is also fairly swingy, but only on shot numbers. I hate variable shot and variable damage weapons. And the plasma suffers the same problems that the plasma cannon does, it only does one damage on a variable number of shots. As for the Harpoon, it is a neat weapon regardless. I really wish it had a melee profile too.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
One is a stand back and shoot.

The other is ‘get up close and rain down hell upon them’.

Castellan is the one that least needs a favourable situation to be useful.

Valiant? Well, I really quite like it. The Flamer is devastating. Effective 28” range, no rolling to hit. But it’s the Damage 2 that’s tickled my pickle with it. Bikes, Heavy Infantry, Light to (in a pinch!) medium vehicles are all in big trouble. Even with a relatively poor roll for the number of shots can be mitigated thanks to Battleshock potential. Harpoon isn’t as great as when your first see it’s stats, but it’s still a good threat against Transports and heavier units. Spend a CP if you must for some re-roll goodness. 11-13 Wounds is never anything to be sniffed at.

Add in the ancillary Weapons, and it’s a mobile threat your opponent has to deal with. Now nobody has mentioned the Flamer on Overwatch, so I suspect I’m missing something (no Overwatch for Superheavies perhaps? Inform me peeps) - but there’s a relatively decent chance that it can wipe out charging units, or at least de-fang them enough that their close combat attacks end well blunted. Quick bit of tap dancing, and even Horde units can be whittle down very quickly. And if I manage to pull off an Overwatch hit with the Harpoon against a Character, I reserve the right to laugh a lot!

You can stand back and shoot with Castellan but you don't have to. If it's safe enough to approach for valiant it's safe enough for castellan. Difference being one NEEDS to get close. Other can start raining hell from the get-go. (btw realized the big knight is even slower than smaller knights so threat range goes away. Turn 1 flamer shoot is def not a quaranteed against gun lines. Especially against anything worth shooting at)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Each flamer does 3d6 hits, which is 10.5 on average.

Against Termis with TH/SS, that's 7 wounds, for about two failed saves. Four, often five if you have two flamers.

'
What 2 flamers? Valiant is armed with harpoon and flamer. Doubtful the knights can double up. Since codex is already out for some who are leaking stuff they would have mentioned. And that would solve issue of plasma weapon for castellan. Twin volcano's!

(and since big knights are flat price plus shoulder weapons that means double volcano would cost same as plasma+volcano)

You can't do double weapons on the Valiant or Castellan. I really think the Valiant should have a melee weapon besides its feet (that harpoon gun should have a melee profile, but since Knights can go in and out of melee easily, no huge loss). But oh well. It's weapons synergize better with the Twin Meltaguns. The Castellan pays points for two weapons it will never use.

 Xenomancers wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Castellan has same meltas. And 1 shot is still 1 shot. Very unreliable. And sorry but rhinos isn't my primary target. Many who are won't get one shotted by harpoon and 4++ or even 3++ makes harpoon very unreliabae when you get one chance.

Castellan outdamages valiant against vehicles. Valiant is better vs flvers(particularly eldar one and elite infantry.but those aren"t everywhere. I need weapons to torch tougg targets that aim to be over 30" as a principle.

What are you worried about? Shadow swords? Yeah - you are going to struggle against criminally undercosted things that are designed to destroy you. Just write those games off.

Realistically I am probably going to be running both super knights an armager with autocannons and a gaurd brigade.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The autocannons are going to be more effective vs the thunderhammers. Plus - it's a great place to shoot your missle that denies invo saves .

Basically any main battle tank, rip tide, contemptator dreadnoughts, sicarans. Even basic land raider if one comes up. Basically anything that has long range gun. Not even worry as in "I'm going to get blown to bits by one shot" but "stuff that are worth my time shooting". Those will be lobbing shells at you from 36"> when valiant threat range is 28"+advance so you are never shooting flamer vs those T1, some will deny you shooting on T2. And harpoon will be having hard time. Even on advance you are looking at turn 2 threat range of 37". Not enough to really hit them on T2.

Turn 1 I would expect to be able to shoot at stuff like imperial guard troopers, fire warriors...Good targets for near 600 pts knight eh? Turn 3 knight is likely dead if opponent feels it's worth taking out over smaller variants.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Insularum wrote:

In no way do I think the Castellan is bad, but I'm afraid I don't agree with the faulty logic claim. There are better sources of plasma, over any range, and the lance does only shine when facing titanic units - versus a non titanic T8+ target it isn't much better than any other good AT weapon. I think the Castellan is solid, but it just doesn't jump out at being best in class at anything - just a big dependable unit.

Better against non-titanic than the harpoon.

The bigger case of faulty logic is complaining about the hookshots range (love the reference, am keeping that ), by hanging back with the Castellan you forfeit 4 meltas and 12 stomps which is more than enough to close the 76/86 damage differential. The output over time will also continue to swing in the Valiants favour as it's main gun does not degrade, it laughs at hit modifiers, it uses all of the weapons you have paid for, and is simply ridiculous at overwatch.

Umm...who says castellan is going to be hanging back? Difference is you are wasting 1-2 turns of not shooting with ANY guns with valiant. Especially against targets. Against MBT's etc harpoon is often firing on turn 3 earliest. Volcano and plasma will be firing them from the get-go AND will be reaching with meltas and stomps about same time.

so castellan: will be shooting 1-2 turns more and all the weapons. It's not forfeiting any weapons. Yes degrade hurts but there's trait against that and I find often enough when my knight gets degraded it's going to blow up either right away or turn later anyway so 1 turn of degred firepower. That's still better than 1-2 turn of NO shooting. Well except maybe against 60 pts infantry squads!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:
Well, it is not that Castellan absolutely must sit back. If the enemy has no melee units that can realistically threaten a Knight (and many armies don't) then it can freely move closer and use the meltas and stomps too. Valiant on the other hand has to always move close in order to do anything worthwhile.

And if something threatens knight in h2h then it's not really ideal place for valiant to be in either. Yes the flamer overwatch is nice but many things that wreck knight will survive it. Or it will be first charged with something cheap that CAN survive. Or will be denied overwatch to begin with by some ability(several armies that can realistically threaten knight in h2h has such ability).

It's nice weapon no doubt and doubtless I'll get one one day but it's hardly be-all end-all weapon.

BTW incidentally using 1CP reroll castellan main guns will in average put tad short of 9 wounds against alaitoc crimson hunter(or comparable T/save -2 to hit target). Add in pair of the mini battlecannons and that's one sorry state flier minimum. More if you are willing to risk the overheat wounds.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
I like the Valiant. With a pair of Siegebreaker Cannons on the back, it has plenty to do while it trudges up the field. The Conflagration Cannon has an effective range of 28", so it isn't like you won't be using it in most deployments on turn 1. Maybe if your opponent is sitting on their back edge.

24" between armies. Opponent doesn't have to set up to the edges. Halfway on their DZ is already 30". And of course he doesn't have to deploy straight front of your knight but can put diagonically.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

Tyel wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
I like the Valiant. With a pair of Siegebreaker Cannons on the back, it has plenty to do while it trudges up the field. The Conflagration Cannon has an effective range of 28", so it isn't like you won't be using it in most deployments on turn 1. Maybe if your opponent is sitting on their back edge.

The problem is with just 22" you probably won't hit anything worthwhile with the harpoon. If your opponent is gunlining with 36"+ range units you may not even get a chance in turn 2.

While I think the flamer is probably the most interesting weapon, I am not sure it carries enough to make up the difference versus the plasma & volcano lance.

The problem with the Volcano Lance is that it is way too swingy. Variable damage blows. Yes, the Conflagration Cannon is also fairly swingy, but only on shot numbers. I hate variable shot and variable damage weapons. And the plasma suffers the same problems that the plasma cannon does, it only does one damage on a variable number of shots. As for the Harpoon, it is a neat weapon regardless. I really wish it had a melee profile too.

What? You call plasma and volcano swingy and think harpoon which is by far most swingy weapons of the 4 main guns as neat weapon?

If you hate swingy weapons you absolutely must avoid harpoon at all cost. Heavy 1 is epitome of swingy weapons. Especially when you are looking at one that gets basically one chance to take out target. Who often have inv save to begin with. Yey there's the riptide. Let's hit on 3+. Wound on 2+. Okay that's nice. Then he saves on 3++. Oh and has CP reroll to help as well. Sure if all that works you hurt it but getting that 1 wound is not something you can rely on.

(Assuming tau player is kind enough to let you reach riptide to begin with)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
You can't do double weapons on the Valiant or Castellan. I really think the Valiant should have a melee weapon besides its feet (that harpoon gun should have a melee profile, but since Knights can go in and out of melee easily, no huge loss). But oh well. It's weapons synergize better with the Twin Meltaguns. The Castellan pays points for two weapons it will never use.

Never use except same amount of turns valiant can.

Castellan isn't immobile nor does it actually get any extra firepower from being back. It can stay back but unlike valiant it's not forced to do anything. It can and often should be moving forward since you want those stomp attacks as well as meltas AND you want to be going for objectives since you have so few models to begin with.

Don't make mistake of thinking castellan sits back in corner without moving. It won't. But unlike valiant it doesn't have to go full speed ahead to direction enemy dictates to reach with it's weapons to shoot. Castellan can sit or move and even better move direction YOU want rather than where enemy moves the targets you want to shoot. Valiant will be often having to decide shoot with guns or go for objectives.

If you are going up against Titanic units, Castellan is better. But if you are not, then I would say probably Valiant is more useful. If you face a full horde army, your Castellan isn't going to do much as you use your titan killing gun to kill off cheap infantry models. And do you really expect to face titanic units every game?

Valiant is a lot more multi purpose. Even if you are facing other titanic units, your valiant can get into range and wreck havoc. Its not like it doesn't have other guns other than its huge flamer and that harpoon. Its 4 melta guns are all the armaments on its shoulder pads will do plenty against titanic units too.

Valiant is so anti horde its not even funny. I can't imagine any horde army that wants to charge a Valiant. And while it isn't as good as the Castellan against other knights or say a Tesseract vault. Its not totally useless either. It will still do plenty of damage at that sweet spot range of 12 inches.

So, unless you have a very specific role in mind for your Dominus class (its only going to stand back at max range and shoot), and you are fairly confident you will be facing titanic units really often, otherwise, I think that the Valiant is alot more general purpose.

Playing a shooty army? Your valiant can be the sole countercharging unit while still contributing at long range with its other guns. Playing a more close in army? Then your valiant loves it. Be it facing horde, vehicles, etc etc, Valiant will never feel inadequate.

So, yeah, I think Valiant is more useful. Castellan is for list tailoring.

Eldenfirefly wrote:
If you are going up against Titanic units, Castellan is better. But if you are not, then I would say probably Valiant is more useful. If you face a full horde army, your Castellan isn't going to do much as you use your titan killing gun to kill off cheap infantry models. And do you really expect to face titanic units every game?

Ummm...There's targets other than titanic/horde. Like...You know? Tanks? Monsters? All those carnifexes, greater daemons, riptides, predators, leman russes etc where castellan owns valiant. By the time valiant gets to shoot(assuming it's not already dead) castellan has already blown 1-2 of them and possibly hurt another or two.

In what meta you play if after horde infantry next biggest thing is titanic models O_o

Valiant is a lot more multi purpose. Even if you are facing other titanic units, your valiant can get into range and wreck havoc. Its not like it doesn't have other guns other than its huge flamer and that harpoon. Its 4 melta guns are all the armaments on its shoulder pads will do plenty against titanic units too.

Same meltas and shoulder pads castellan has...

Valiant: "Yey I have meltas and shoulder guns"
Castellan: *points to identical guns*

My point is that Valiant is more multi purpose because it is also good against hordes. I don't really think Castellan is that great against hordes.

Sure, there are other targets. But you haven't seen armies made up of nothing but horde like models? I have seen lists like that. Nothing but characters and infantry type models. Zero vehicles, zero titanic units.

Castellan likes to hang back and shoot, so those melta guns are often wasted. Valiant likes to close in and shoot, so the melta guns are not wasted. The biggest weakness of going closer to shoot (that of being charged in melee) is much reduced for the Valiant because its Confrag cannon is so devastating. I am just saying that the Valiant is good in a lot more situations than the Castellan. And even against titanic units, which the castellan is better, I think the Valiant is not really that far behind if it gets into that sweet spot 12 inch range where it can bring its 4 melta guns into play. Sure, you could argue that the Castellan can also use those same 4 melta guns, but if you are playing the Castellan, would you really be trying to move it into close range?

I like the Valiant because it auto hits flyers with a high strength weapon that doesn't care about the degrading profile and because it's made to advance and hopefully end up in a huge explosion inside the enemy lines. If I had to choose between one of these knights and a shadowsword, i'd rather go with the knights since the chances of them surviving the first turn are a lot higher.

This is such a circular argument that I really just want to point everyone back to a middle ground.

Both are super duper good. The Castellan is there if you're facing Shadowswords, other Knights, Daemon Primarchs, vehicle spam armies (primarily Leman Russes), etc, which, if you've been paying attention to the tournament meta, are all common enough to where having a viable solution to dealing with them at long range from a Knight army is a big deal. Seeing as Shadowswords are people's usual answer to super-heavies, Daemon Primarchs tend to be a great counter to Knights, and Knights in general will get more popular thanks to having a good codex, it's not hard to see why the Castellan will generally be a very good pick heading into a tournament. A (well priced) Knight being able to kill or at least severely degrade a Mortarion/Magnus before either of those can reach it is unheard of, as is the ability to efficiently trade with a Shadowsword without having to worry about getting past all the space-fillers.

On the flip side, the Valiant is there for Custodes in general but specifically the Biker Captains, Daemon Princes, flyers of all varieties but especially the Aeldari ones, hordes, light to medium vehicles, any kind of army that relies on to-hit penalties, assault armies that lack Overwatch-denying abilities or can soak up its Overwatch and tarpit it, etc. Hordes are more common than anything else at tournaments, and Custodes' Captains are present in nearly every tournament-worthy Imperium army nowadays, so having a unit that handles both roles well is great. Now, that's not to say the Valiant is super efficient against hordes...it's just better at dealing with them than the Castellan. It will reliably kill between half and two thirds of a 30-strong squad a turn from shooting then hopefully most of the rest of the squad with Titanic Feet. Besides that, however, the main thing about it is its area denial, especially with the Hawkshroud Overwatch stratagem, as has been proven in a few battle reports already. Board control wins games and the Valiant does a better job at it than the Castellan.

Also, let me dispel something really quickly; just because the Castellan has long range guns does not mean it wants to sit back the entire game. Look at how people have always used Knights in this edition; even those that have mediocre Overwatch potential or lack a dedicated melee weapon still push up the field because their Titanic Feet are scary as hell, and this is true even for the Dominus class Knights and their weakened WS4+. Just don't blindly rush it forward into a bad situation....as is the case with literally every other high value model in the game. Plan ahead, be smart, stay safe. Tactics 101. Saying the Castellan won't be using it's four meltagun shots and doesn't want to get close to enemies is way off the mark and completely untrue. Hell, the Valiant won't always want to close with the enemy either because some armies don't care about that Overwatch and will kill it like they do any other Knight - in melee. Some of those counters are present in top tier tournament builds too, so saying "well the Valiant will be using those meltagun shots but the Castellan won't" as if that is some universal dogma still rings hollow.

They're both really good against certain aspects of the current tournament meta, especially if you assume that you take the nigh mandatory relic flamer and relic plasma on each applicable variant. Castellans will easily win firefights with Shadowswords provided you correctly buff their invulnerable saves up, give your army a means of dealing with Daemon Primarchs (Castellan with 1CP re-roll ones stratagem active will fairly easily kill unbuffed Magnus turn one, should severely cripple Mortarion provided Deathshroud (if any) are dealt with first) and other big nasty fast moving targets from afar before they can reach you, are a fantastic candidate for the House Raven re-roll-all-ones stratagem, and generally will clear the field of vehicles and monsters extremely quickly if left unattended. A well-positioned Hawkshroud Valiant screws Custodes Captains over so hard that it might be an auto-pick for anyone running Knights (just remember that it will still get kicked in by Slamguinius/Blood Angels Captain that ignores Overwatch, so be careful), this also applies to Daemon Princes and other high damage characters who hide behind their sub-10 Wounds characteristic and Overwatch generally not being scary to leave their mark. You also completely mess up those Alaitoc Hemlock wing lists by dictating where they can move if they want to survive thanks to their low 16" range guns, and generally will make most opponents squirm under the pressure it applies with fewer applicable counters than would be present for any other Knight variant.

Which one is "more in the meta" is a fairly easy question to answer; it's the Valiant. All those tournament-winning Imperium and Aeldari armies tend to be built around gimmicks the Valiant counters (except Slamguinius, sadly). However, if the meta shifts even more to Knights and other super heavies - you wouldn't believe how prolific Shadowswords can be at some tournaments - the Castellan will definitely carve out a place by virtue of being able to tango with them and win. The Castellan can comfortably win super heavy duels and other forms of anti-tank barrages by virtue of attaining a 3++ against shooting to survive a first turn alpha strike, something the Shadowsword can't do. Being able to plop a big model down and not be worried about whether you go first or second with regards to potentially losing it can be a big psychological tax on your opponent.

GW just needs to add Pistol to the Harpoon’s keywords, so it can fire into melee. That would be fun.

SJ

They need to add a space whale model for Chaos and put it in a box set with the Valiant.

And so, my conclusion to 4 pages of arguments and counter arguments? .. just take both! lol

Eldenfirefly wrote:
And so, my conclusion to 4 pages of arguments and counter arguments? .. just take both! lol

Unless a 40K faction gets a space whale (which, from looking at AoS recently might be a possibility...).

Caederes wrote:
This is such a circular argument that I really just want to point everyone back to a middle ground.

Both are super duper good. The Castellan is there if you're facing Shadowswords, other Knights, Daemon Primarchs, vehicle spam armies (primarily Leman Russes), etc, which, if you've been paying attention to the tournament meta, are all common enough to where having a viable solution to dealing with them at long range from a Knight army is a big deal. Seeing as Shadowswords are people's usual answer to super-heavies, Daemon Primarchs tend to be a great counter to Knights, and Knights in general will get more popular thanks to having a good codex, it's not hard to see why the Castellan will generally be a very good pick heading into a tournament. A (well priced) Knight being able to kill or at least severely degrade a Mortarion/Magnus before either of those can reach it is unheard of, as is the ability to efficiently trade with a Shadowsword without having to worry about getting past all the space-fillers.

On the flip side, the Valiant is there for Custodes in general but specifically the Biker Captains, Daemon Princes, flyers of all varieties but especially the Aeldari ones, hordes, light to medium vehicles, any kind of army that relies on to-hit penalties, assault armies that lack Overwatch-denying abilities or can soak up its Overwatch and tarpit it, etc. Hordes are more common than anything else at tournaments, and Custodes' Captains are present in nearly every tournament-worthy Imperium army nowadays, so having a unit that handles both roles well is great. Now, that's not to say the Valiant is super efficient against hordes...it's just better at dealing with them than the Castellan. It will reliably kill between half and two thirds of a 30-strong squad a turn from shooting then hopefully most of the rest of the squad with Titanic Feet. Besides that, however, the main thing about it is its area denial, especially with the Hawkshroud Overwatch stratagem, as has been proven in a few battle reports already. Board control wins games and the Valiant does a better job at it than the Castellan.

Also, let me dispel something really quickly; just because the Castellan has long range guns does not mean it wants to sit back the entire game. Look at how people have always used Knights in this edition; even those that have mediocre Overwatch potential or lack a dedicated melee weapon still push up the field because their Titanic Feet are scary as hell, and this is true even for the Dominus class Knights and their weakened WS4+. Just don't blindly rush it forward into a bad situation....as is the case with literally every other high value model in the game. Plan ahead, be smart, stay safe. Tactics 101. Saying the Castellan won't be using it's four meltagun shots and doesn't want to get close to enemies is way off the mark and completely untrue. Hell, the Valiant won't always want to close with the enemy either because some armies don't care about that Overwatch and will kill it like they do any other Knight - in melee. Some of those counters are present in top tier tournament builds too, so saying "well the Valiant will be using those meltagun shots but the Castellan won't" as if that is some universal dogma still rings hollow.

They're both really good against certain aspects of the current tournament meta, especially if you assume that you take the nigh mandatory relic flamer and relic plasma on each applicable variant. Castellans will easily win firefights with Shadowswords provided you correctly buff their invulnerable saves up, give your army a means of dealing with Daemon Primarchs (Castellan with 1CP re-roll ones stratagem active will fairly easily kill unbuffed Magnus turn one, should severely cripple Mortarion provided Deathshroud (if any) are dealt with first) and other big nasty fast moving targets from afar before they can reach you, are a fantastic candidate for the House Raven re-roll-all-ones stratagem, and generally will clear the field of vehicles and monsters extremely quickly if left unattended. A well-positioned Hawkshroud Valiant screws Custodes Captains over so hard that it might be an auto-pick for anyone running Knights (just remember that it will still get kicked in by Slamguinius/Blood Angels Captain that ignores Overwatch, so be careful), this also applies to Daemon Princes and other high damage characters who hide behind their sub-10 Wounds characteristic and Overwatch generally not being scary to leave their mark. You also completely mess up those Alaitoc Hemlock wing lists by dictating where they can move if they want to survive thanks to their low 16" range guns, and generally will make most opponents squirm under the pressure it applies with fewer applicable counters than would be present for any other Knight variant.

Which one is "more in the meta" is a fairly easy question to answer; it's the Valiant. All those tournament-winning Imperium and Aeldari armies tend to be built around gimmicks the Valiant counters (except Slamguinius, sadly). However, if the meta shifts even more to Knights and other super heavies - you wouldn't believe how prolific Shadowswords can be at some tournaments - the Castellan will definitely carve out a place by virtue of being able to tango with them and win. The Castellan can comfortably win super heavy duels and other forms of anti-tank barrages by virtue of attaining a 3++ against shooting to survive a first turn alpha strike, something the Shadowsword can't do. Being able to plop a big model down and not be worried about whether you go first or second with regards to potentially losing it can be a big psychological tax on your opponent.

Well - technically a shadow-sword can avoid alpha strike with tallarn outflank stratagem.

However - I totally agree with your assessment here. Valiant is just the better choice for a single knight if you can only take one. The two options do complement each other quite nicely though. I will probably bring both.

 Scott-S6 wrote:

Eldenfirefly wrote:
And so, my conclusion to 4 pages of arguments and counter arguments? .. just take both! lol

Unless a 40K faction gets a space whale (which, from looking at AoS recently might be a possibility...).

It'd be Tzeentch of course. Those manta rays need some friends.

 Scott-S6 wrote:

Eldenfirefly wrote:
And so, my conclusion to 4 pages of arguments and counter arguments? .. just take both! lol

Unless a 40K faction gets a space whale (which, from looking at AoS recently might be a possibility...).

Just last night I saw a flying sea-turtle model....

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
You can't do double weapons on the Valiant or Castellan. I really think the Valiant should have a melee weapon besides its feet (that harpoon gun should have a melee profile, but since Knights can go in and out of melee easily, no huge loss). But oh well. It's weapons synergize better with the Twin Meltaguns. The Castellan pays points for two weapons it will never use.

What? That is so lame.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
You can't do double weapons on the Valiant or Castellan. I really think the Valiant should have a melee weapon besides its feet (that harpoon gun should have a melee profile, but since Knights can go in and out of melee easily, no huge loss). But oh well. It's weapons synergize better with the Twin Meltaguns. The Castellan pays points for two weapons it will never use.

What? That is so lame.

None of the other knights allow double weapons so I'm not sure why this is a surprise.

Yeah, fair enough. I just wish I could rock double flamers.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Yeah, fair enough. I just wish I could rock double flamers.

Or double avengers. Or double volcanos.

Even double thermal or double RFBC would be quite good.

Got to go Chaos for that.

Caederes wrote:

 Scott-S6 wrote:

Eldenfirefly wrote:
And so, my conclusion to 4 pages of arguments and counter arguments? .. just take both! lol

Unless a 40K faction gets a space whale (which, from looking at AoS recently might be a possibility...).

It'd be Tzeentch of course. Those manta rays need some friends.

Kind of tempted to use the Harpoon on a Haruspex.

Right.

Down.

The.

Gullet.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Caederes wrote:

 Scott-S6 wrote:

Eldenfirefly wrote:
And so, my conclusion to 4 pages of arguments and counter arguments? .. just take both! lol

Unless a 40K faction gets a space whale (which, from looking at AoS recently might be a possibility...).

It'd be Tzeentch of course. Those manta rays need some friends.

Kind of tempted to use the Harpoon on a Haruspex.

Right.

Down.

The.

Gullet.

Unfortunately - It still probably wont 1 shot it with the harpoon but it's pretty close. If it's not leviathan you gotta a good chance to have a Haruspex kebab

4 pages into this thread and I still can't decide.

I know. I think I'm going Valiant but that lance doh...

It's an easy question if you plan on running two Dominus' as the two are really good together, just very pricey and pretty much lock you out from running an effective four Knight (not counting Armigers) list.

Individually, it's meta based. Assault armies that specifically don't have Overwatch denial or easy ways to stop you falling back? Valiant. Enemy super heavies that are hard to reach? Castellan. Aeldari/Raven Guard/any army with lots of negative hit modifiers, especially ones loaded up on flyers? Valiant. Tanks everywhere? Castellan. Board control? Valiant. Daemon Primarchs? Castellan. Hordes? Valiant. Enemy Knights? Castellan.

Whichever Dominus ticks most of those categories is the one you should play.

My reasoning at the moment is that since I am 100% waiting for the Sisters reboot, flamer all the way.