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.

Imperialis knight are for supporting/synergising with other imperial detachments. Most of their relics and strategems benefit a mixed army well.

Mechanicus knights are for pure knight armies, or a single non-knight supprt detachment armies.

Mechanicus knights are set to survive/heal themselves, or be healed by their support forces.

Imperialis knights have no access to healing other than the garbage fortification(which does benefit the army the knight is supporting).

Eldenfirefly wrote:
Personally, I think a Gallant is good enough with its basic weaponery such that it doesn't need to further add on hierlooms like that paragon gauntlet. If you are already hitting stuff with a WS 2+ and you have access to a basic reaper chainsword and a thunderstrike Gauntlet, there aren't many things that would stand up to you in close combat when you charge them.

You are probably right about weapons although the Paragon Gauntlet is good if you know you are facing really heavy hitters on the other side (e.g. Deathguard).

Where the Gallant can use some help is durability as it will spend a lot of time in close combat where its Ion Shield will not protect it. "Sanctuary" or "Armour of the Sainted Ion" are really good on the Gallant as they protect it against enemy CC monsters such as Slamguinius, Hammernators or other melee-orientated LoWs.

On the Imperial vs Admech debate, don’t forget that you can have both in one detachment, by taking a freeblade.

So if you want a Castellan for your Imperial force, grab yourself an Admech freeblade with Cawl’s wrath. It will still count as one of your three knights for your CPs and won’t stop your other knights from enjoying household traits. Roll for two benefits and pick the least bad burdens you can think of. Haunted by failure and impetus nature seem like they wouldn’t be too bad, though not if you needed to fall back.

Mandragola wrote:
On the Imperial vs Admech debate, don’t forget that you can have both in one detachment, by taking a freeblade.

So if you want a Castellan for your Imperial force, grab yourself an Admech freeblade with Cawl’s wrath. It will still count as one of your three knights for your CPs and won’t stop your other knights from enjoying household traits. Roll for two benefits and pick the least bad burdens you can think of. Haunted by failure and impetus nature seem like they wouldn’t be too bad, though not if you needed to fall back.

Interesting! I didn't even think about that option!

 Karhedron wrote:

Eldenfirefly wrote:
Personally, I think a Gallant is good enough with its basic weaponery such that it doesn't need to further add on hierlooms like that paragon gauntlet. If you are already hitting stuff with a WS 2+ and you have access to a basic reaper chainsword and a thunderstrike Gauntlet, there aren't many things that would stand up to you in close combat when you charge them.

You are probably right about weapons although the Paragon Gauntlet is good if you know you are facing really heavy hitters on the other side (e.g. Deathguard).

Where the Gallant can use some help is durability as it will spend a lot of time in close combat where its Ion Shield will not protect it. "Sanctuary" or "Armour of the Sainted Ion" are really good on the Gallant as they protect it against enemy CC monsters such as Slamguinius, Hammernators or other melee-orientated LoWs.

Armour relic is bad; 2+ save is not very effective vs the stuff in melee that scares your knight.

Sanctuary is the way to go on a Gallant. Or, if your Questor Mechanicus, Mark of the Omnissiah; It will not Die on your melee beastie will keep him wrecking stuff longer than getting a 6+ save vs AP-4.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

 Karhedron wrote:

Eldenfirefly wrote:
Personally, I think a Gallant is good enough with its basic weaponery such that it doesn't need to further add on hierlooms like that paragon gauntlet. If you are already hitting stuff with a WS 2+ and you have access to a basic reaper chainsword and a thunderstrike Gauntlet, there aren't many things that would stand up to you in close combat when you charge them.

You are probably right about weapons although the Paragon Gauntlet is good if you know you are facing really heavy hitters on the other side (e.g. Deathguard).

Where the Gallant can use some help is durability as it will spend a lot of time in close combat where its Ion Shield will not protect it. "Sanctuary" or "Armour of the Sainted Ion" are really good on the Gallant as they protect it against enemy CC monsters such as Slamguinius, Hammernators or other melee-orientated LoWs.

Armour relic is bad; 2+ save is not very effective vs the stuff in melee that scares your knight.

Sanctuary is the way to go on a Gallant. Or, if your Questor Mechanicus, Mark of the Omnissiah; It will not Die on your melee beastie will keep him wrecking stuff longer than getting a 6+ save vs AP-4.

I disagree with this. In fact, few weapons have better than -3 AP, and many have less than that. So a 2+ armour save is nearly always as good as or better than a 5++ in melee. If someone's hitting you with a thunder hammer you'll still get a 5+ save if your base save is 2+, but you'd get a 4+ save against something like another knight kicking you. It also means you get a 4+ save against things like dark reapers.

The current meta has a lot of invulnerable saves, which incentivises people to go for guns without a high AP. The more that people switch towards ap-1 or -2, because anthing better than that is wasted vs DE, Custodes, and indeed knights themselves, the better a 2+ save becomes.

Nevermind, answered my own question.

U02dah4 wrote:
Untill you come up against a hoard and do nothing

Dunno. 3 contemptators with twin autocannons made good job vs my orks. Those helverins don#t look worse than that. 48 shots kills lots of guys on small foot print and fast

Guns aren't much of an issue for the gallant; he wants to, and should be, stuck in melee until dead. Most melee weapons that a knight is frightened by(d3 damage or more) are AP -3 or better; so that 2+ save is the same as the base sanctuary invulnerable. But, you can rotate the ion shields to get a 4++ in melee as well making sanctuary better than a 2+.

The Armour might be a good choice for a less melee dedicated knight for the reasons you have stated, but even then their are better options in the relics that you would want to take.

Except a good opponent wont let that happen. When I last played against tgem i kept throwing small guard units at it which died or fell back letting me shoot it

I think the Gallant makes you a bit of a hostage to fortune, and your opponent’s choices. It’s an awful lot of points worth of model that has to get into cc to do anything, and your opponent knows that. It’s better in cc than other knights and cheaper, but not all that much better and not all that much cheaper.

Personally I prefer other questoris knights because you have more choices with them. You can go off and charge people, shooting them on the way. You can also hang back for a turn or two if there are scary things in their army you’d rather not fight up close. Shoot those things dead and then have your knights jump up and down on the rest of the army.

IMO, Hawkshroud Household beats out the 1cp 'pretend you're at top bracket' stratagem every time. Imperialis, in my mind, is the way to go. The Valiant with Traitor's Pyre is so potent, and the Valiant wants to be up close in melta range, whereas the Castellan will likely never get to use its melta guns if you're playing right.

As for the Gallant... I'm not a huge fan. The Chainsword and stompy feet do enough damage in my games, unless I'm going up against another Knight list, in which case I'll stick the Paragon Gauntlet onto an Errant so it can shoot and soften up the target before getting into melee.

I'd only take a Gallant if I was also taking a Crusader, but the expense of the Crusader kind of negates the discount on the Gallant...

I like the looks of the Gallant because of the 2+ WS. That makes a big difference in combat killiness.

Going from Gallant to Warden costs between 50-100 points. But you are also paying 1 attack and 1 weapon skill. You are also sinking more points into the same amount of wounds. The gallant also gets the full benefit from all the hosuehold and strategem and relic buffs. So that gun arm better be amazing for what it costs.

I would rate the opportunity cost of going from a gallant to a warden as too expensive to justify when I have a 108 point basilisk right on the shelf. Is the basilisk as good as a rapid fire battle cannon? Not quite, but it is 10 more wounds and doesn't subtract from my knight's melee ability. If I am taking a shooting knight, I think it is a castellon or crusader that hides in the back. The single gun arm knights can at best kill 1 MSU unit a turn. They aren't going to be killing hard targets.

You are just all over the place with the wrong.

Going from gallant to a single-gun knight costs: 46 points for TC, 62 for Avenger, and 74 for a RFBC.

Remember to subtract your melee arm(I kept the guantlet for the above numbers).

Yes you are losing 1A and -1WS, but you are gaining attacks first turn or any time you are not in melee.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
You are just all over the place with the wrong.

Going from gallant to a single-gun knight costs: 46 points for TC, 62 for Avenger, and 74 for a RFBC.

Remember to subtract your melee arm(I kept the guantlet for the above numbers).

Yes you are losing 1A and -1WS, but you are gaining attacks first turn or any time you are not in melee.

74 points and -1A, -1WS for a RFBC
108 points, keep the 1A,1WS, +10 T6 wounds for a basilisk

The opportunity cost to get to a shooting knight is steep. I rate the stormspear on a gallant over any of the 1 gun variations.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Wulfey wrote:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
You are just all over the place with the wrong.

Going from gallant to a single-gun knight costs: 46 points for TC, 62 for Avenger, and 74 for a RFBC.

Remember to subtract your melee arm(I kept the guantlet for the above numbers).

Yes you are losing 1A and -1WS, but you are gaining attacks first turn or any time you are not in melee.

74 points and -1A, -1WS for a RFBC
108 points, keep the 1A,1WS, +10 T6 wounds for a basilisk

The opportunity cost to get to a shooting knight is steep. I rate the stormspear on a gallant over any of the 1 gun variations.

Paladins are probably the worst Questoris knight for their price. Even they obviously have significantly more firepower than a basilisk against most targets. For around the price you're quoting you could have a warden with a stormspear on it.

A warden loses 1 attack (or 3 with feet) and 1 point of WS. It gains 12 attacks with its gun, which are all but impossible to prevent, and a heavy flamer that it'll fire every now and then.

It is certainly true that you get more wounds per point with a gallant. But going closer to the enemy usually means that you take more damage as well, so those wounds aren't worth as much. People rapid fire their plasma guns at you, their meltas get in range, they smite you and sometimes people like Guilliman appear and cut your knight right in half.

There's also a CP cost to a Gallant, and other opportunity costs. You want it to use full tilt, and probably landstrider too. So that's used up a warlord trait. You might well want to give it a relic. Maybe you've also picked a house that gets it across the board faster, or makes it hit harder in cc - which means you haven't picked a house like Taranis to make all of your knights live longer. All of these are costs.

Something like a warden needs far less support than that. It can happily kill things on turn 1 with its guns and then on turn 2 it can charge in and start stamping on things. It won't do this as effectively as the Gallant, but actually it'll usually get the job done. And if it sees something scary like Bobby G skulking in amongst a bunch of razorbacks it can hang back and shoot things up with its gatling gun for a while.

COLD CASH wrote:
Seems no one has tried the castellan! Im more drawn to that than the valiant.

I am not completely sold on the Dominus class Knights yet. Both seem like they need the relic version of their weapons to be truly threatening which gives up the opportunity to take other relics. The outrageous 3CP cost of Rotate Ion Shields is also a major downer.

Also there is an odd misfit between their weapons and stats. The Castellan has the cost of 4 melta guns built in an otherwise long ranged weapon platform. The Valiant on the other hand wants to get up close but unlike most other Knights, is only WS4+.

Maybe I am underestimating their destructive potential but I think I will stick to a mix of Questoris and Armigers with a small allied contingent for CP generation.

I really like how the Knights can back out of melee, shoot and/or charge though, and can move over infantry. Surrounding them with horde infantry won't keep them in combat unless it's a deep horde.

It is interesting about that built in melta gun cost. I am wondering if it will be Chapter Approved altered to be more expensive...when does the next Chapter Approved come out?

 Malathrim wrote:
I really like how the Knights can back out of melee, shoot and/or charge though, and can move over infantry. Surrounding them with horde infantry won't keep them in combat unless it's a deep horde.

It is interesting about that built in melta gun cost. I am wondering if it will be Chapter Approved altered to be more expensive...when does the next Chapter Approved come out?

That doubtful. The only reason it's built in is because you can't switch them out for anything. You're still paying for them as a part of the base model.

Also it can't move over infantry unless it is falling back so your opponent can just move small units in its path in there turn and it can only move up to them.

Mandragola wrote:

I disagree with this. In fact, few weapons have better than -3 AP, and many have less than that. So a 2+ armour save is nearly always as good as or better than a 5++ in melee. If someone's hitting you with a thunder hammer you'll still get a 5+ save if your base save is 2+, but you'd get a 4+ save against something like another knight kicking you. It also means you get a 4+ save against things like dark reapers.

The current meta has a lot of invulnerable saves, which incentivises people to go for guns without a high AP. The more that people switch towards ap-1 or -2, because anthing better than that is wasted vs DE, Custodes, and indeed knights themselves, the better a 2+ save becomes.

It is decent I agree with that. However, with the melee shield you can boost your invulnerable to 4+ with a stratagem.

Ice_can wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

Kdash wrote:

COLD CASH wrote:
Seems no one has tried the castellan! Im more drawn to that than the valiant.

My initial thoughts were to go with the Castellan, then, I realised that I’d be forced to go for a Mechanicus household as I think you 100% need the relic plasma.

Going to continue to test my Imperialis ideas a bit more first, and then I might see how they do as Mechanicus.

It is almost as if Mechanicus is better than Imperialis in nearly every way...

They did get some of the better strategums and synergies but I don't think its as clear cut if your not running Admech or a Castellen.
I'm going Imperialis mainly as I don't like the cog boys look and I don't want my knights praying to a

Spoiler:

Ctan

I agree, outside of taking the castellen I don't think it's so cut and dry. I still think Hawkshrowd and Morton are incredibly good.

That is the weird juxtaposition with Questor Imperialis: it jas some very decent houshold traits and relics, but gains less in support from Imperial forces(although it does have a few supporting relics and strategems)

In order to get the most use from Imperialis wargear/strats you need a large main force of other Imperials and then you lose out on the household traditions.

That and the lack of any survivability to questor Imperialis(outside healing, FNP, or IWND) is a hige decision maker in my choice of household.

 Karhedron wrote:

COLD CASH wrote:
Seems no one has tried the castellan! Im more drawn to that than the valiant.

I am not completely sold on the Dominus class Knights yet. Both seem like they need the relic version of their weapons to be truly threatening which gives up the opportunity to take other relics. The outrageous 3CP cost of Rotate Ion Shields is also a major downer.

Also there is an odd misfit between their weapons and stats. The Castellan has the cost of 4 melta guns built in an otherwise long ranged weapon platform. The Valiant on the other hand wants to get up close but unlike most other Knights, is only WS4+.

Maybe I am underestimating their destructive potential but I think I will stick to a mix of Questoris and Armigers with a small allied contingent for CP generation.

Why can't the Castellan get up close and personal? Not happening on turn 1 obviously but turn 2 I don't see a whole ton of missions where he isn't firing his melta vs SOMETHING, or having an enormous area of denial bubble.

Sure he doesn't want to tango in CC, but neither does the valiant.

Also I don't see why you can't take an allied contingent for CP generation just because you take a big knight. I know it's a lot of points but I'm going to try out a list on Monday with a Castellan, an IG brigade, and probably a supreme command of shield captain jet bikes. I'll likely transition that supreme command over to a BA battalion, but I need a few more scouts to make that happen

It is a knee-jerk assumption based on gun ranges. No knight, other than the Gallant(and Valiant due to Harpoon range), ever want to be within 12".

Yes, the Castellan can function fine at short range; you just don't want him in combat and he can function at long range just fine.

Every knight does - against the right unit.

Take a crusader sure you don't want it up against a CC unit of thunder hammers but If you ignore its feat your ignoreing a fair portion of damage and CC vs a guard squad or a vanguard/ranger squad doesn't put your night at risk and can easily finish off that squad

Plus a paragon gauntletting warden isnt much worse than a gallant

Yeah, with the ability to fire on the move and fire if engaged you're wasting an awful lot of potential in not taking your 12 stomps every turn.

drbored wrote:
IMO, Hawkshroud Household beats out the 1cp 'pretend you're at top bracket' stratagem every time. Imperialis, in my mind, is the way to go. The Valiant with Traitor's Pyre is so potent, and the Valiant wants to be up close in melta range, whereas the Castellan will likely never get to use its melta guns if you're playing right.

As for the Gallant... I'm not a huge fan. The Chainsword and stompy feet do enough damage in my games, unless I'm going up against another Knight list, in which case I'll stick the Paragon Gauntlet onto an Errant so it can shoot and soften up the target before getting into melee.

I'd only take a Gallant if I was also taking a Crusader, but the expense of the Crusader kind of negates the discount on the Gallant...

Playing right with castellan means moving, approaching, using all guns. If you sit backfar with it you are misusing it.

Knights tend to either be over half wounds or like 2-3 wounds left. That's why i'm not sold on hawkshroud. That's not a new trait for low's yet not really seen on competive lists


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Karhedron wrote:

COLD CASH wrote:
Seems no one has tried the castellan! Im more drawn to that than the valiant.

I am not completely sold on the Dominus class Knights yet. Both seem like they need the relic version of their weapons to be truly threatening which gives up the opportunity to take other relics. The outrageous 3CP cost of Rotate Ion Shields is also a major downer.

Also there is an odd misfit between their weapons and stats. The Castellan has the cost of 4 melta guns built in an otherwise long ranged weapon platform. The Valiant on the other hand wants to get up close but unlike most other Knights, is only WS4+.

Maybe I am underestimating their destructive potential but I think I will stick to a mix of Questoris and Armigers with a small allied contingent for CP generation.

Long range means you start shooting from word go(unlike valiant). But you should still move forward. Knights are too few to waste one model sitting back. Thus you move forward thus getting melta guns to range.

Treat range as bonus, not to decide how to use. Main benefit is to allow to hurt enemy from turn 1 onwara rather than say valiant or gallant

10" move and 18" range. A Valiant will likely still be shooting turn 1.
Especially if its Raven and can advance and shoot.