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.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/06/09/tanks-are-back-on-trackgw-homepage-post-1/

Well hopefully GW remember that we payed a lot of points for abilities that are now just flat rules.

Looks like the Day 1 Eratta is going to be
Large and fundamental to how Knights play in 9th

Those rules aren't nearly the same as what Knights have. Now other tanks can shoot into close combat at -1 BS. They will still be unable to fire if they fall back. That means you have to choose between shooting (badly) with the tank or shooting into the assault with the rest of the army.

Knights get to freely fall back, ignoring wrap arounds, to shoot at full BS to any target, then choose to charge back or not. They can eat a charge and just walk away while the rest of the army shoots the enemy.

Like I said earlier, this rules change doesn't invalidate the value of Super Heavy Walker or Hounds of War.

 DarkHound wrote:
Those rules aren't nearly the same as what Knights have. Now other tanks can shoot into close combat at -1 BS. They will still be unable to fire if they fall back. That means you have to choose between shooting (badly) with the tank or shooting into the assault with the rest of the army.

Knights get to freely fall back, ignoring wrap arounds, to shoot at full BS to any target, then choose to charge back or not. They can eat a charge and just walk away while the rest of the army shoots the enemy.

Like I said earlier, this rules change doesn't invalidate the value of Super Heavy Walker or Hounds of War.

Who said they were the same?

We still pay a lot more points than comparable or better weapons in part because of rules that have just been handed out game wide.

1 The premium points costs should be getting reduced now.
2 Superheavy walker etc will need heavy errata to make sence with these new rules.

Between the codex and Engine war we are going to need a lot of errata for a number of rules to interact properly with the new edition.

How are we feeling about these terrain rules.

My enthusiasm is a little dented. I’ve got a lot of questions about the viability of knights in 9th so far.

Probably that I’m being a bit pessimistic and good things are to come.

That’s possible right?

 Ideasweasel wrote:
How are we feeling about these terrain rules.

My enthusiasm is a little dented. I’ve got a lot of questions about the viability of knights in 9th so far.

Probably that I’m being a bit pessimistic and good things are to come.

That’s possible right?

Given they have said weapons with Blast will see significant points increases to reflect their improved performance.
RFBC is already over priced thank you GW.
Thermal Cannons and Ironstorm pods will also likely be blasts too and arn't exactly steller for their points either.

Knights can't benifit from their new terrain rules.
Simply put if they see any points increases I'm highly doubtful it's going to change much from 8th edition. You'll struggle to hit a 50% win ratio.

Armiger spam on the other hand does look more and more like the way to go.
Guess I'm ordering more moriax once FW starts up again.

It depends in what format knights as a skew list in team formats such as WTC will still be big.

Knights in solo lists will still struggle with the problem that as a skew list there are lists we deal with well but there are also lists that we deal with badly.

I like using knights in competitive games/taking them to a tournament. I usually bring guard and Admech allies. My current list does ok apart from tau/GSC/ultra top marine stuff like ravenguard centurions

I’m not feeling so confident going into 9th.

Really hoping we have a good rule or bit of info coming to keep us encouraged

I looked at the FAQ's and couldn't find an exact answer. If I have a Knight and AdMech Mars detachment how would the Knight of the Cog trait interact with their double canticles?

It seems to me that a Crusader with RFBC and Icarus Autocannon would benefit greatly from the +1 Str canticle. Str 8 Autocannon, Str 9 RFBC, Str 5 Heavy Stubbers... throw on Headsman's Mark to clear out some of these new vehicle-heavy lists!

In 9th edition that's a big unknown at the moment as exsisting codex's will be getting new FAQ/Errata dropping with the edition change.
Allies will cost CP in 8th thats confirmed the amount of CP is TBD. Not to mention Knights seem to have had the cover rules designed to exclude them and with all the new Admech stuff I suspect you may be better served with admech units instead.

Knights are part of the AdMech codex, so they should have an option to use them regardless. Its fun to theory-craft at least.

bmsattler wrote:
Knights are part of the AdMech codex, so they should have an option to use them regardless. Its fun to theory-craft at least.

Except if that's the datasheet your using I wouldn't expect you to be able to have acess to any of the Knight codex strategums etc.
If you are trying to get acess to the strategums, house holds, aligence traits etc, I would expect that to cost CP as your adding a second codex.

The cost could just be the cost for a second detatchment

bmsattler wrote:
I looked at the FAQ's and couldn't find an exact answer. If I have a Knight and AdMech Mars detachment how would the Knight of the Cog trait interact with their double canticles?

It seems to me that a Crusader with RFBC and Icarus Autocannon would benefit greatly from the +1 Str canticle. Str 8 Autocannon, Str 9 RFBC, Str 5 Heavy Stubbers... throw on Headsman's Mark to clear out some of these new vehicle-heavy lists!

The AdMech army rolls one canticle, then Mars rolls for a second. This is important for the re-roll canticle Warlord trait: you have to roll the global one first and can choose to re-roll that, then you roll the Mars specific one and can't re-roll it. If you use Knight of the Cog, it only applies the first canticle since Knights can't gain the Mars keyword. That being said, Cawl can still add or subtract one to the global canticle roll, which applies to the Knight.

If you take a Knight from the AdMech codex, it doesn't have access to any of the Knight codex relics, warlord traits, or stratagems. The only reason to bother is ITC lets you take one Knight and still call yourself pure AdMech for faction ranking points. There's no in-game mechanical advantage to taking the Knight from the AdMech book instead of from the Knight codex. In 9th, it's very unlikely that there will be an additional CP cost if the detachment is from another codex, beyond the cost of the detachment itself.

 DarkHound wrote:

bmsattler wrote:
I looked at the FAQ's and couldn't find an exact answer. If I have a Knight and AdMech Mars detachment how would the Knight of the Cog trait interact with their double canticles?

It seems to me that a Crusader with RFBC and Icarus Autocannon would benefit greatly from the +1 Str canticle. Str 8 Autocannon, Str 9 RFBC, Str 5 Heavy Stubbers... throw on Headsman's Mark to clear out some of these new vehicle-heavy lists!

The AdMech army rolls one canticle, then Mars rolls for a second. This is important for the re-roll canticle Warlord trait: you have to roll the global one first and can choose to re-roll that, then you roll the Mars specific one and can't re-roll it. If you use Knight of the Cog, it only applies the first canticle since Knights can't gain the Mars keyword. That being said, Cawl can still add or subtract one to the global canticle roll, which applies to the Knight.

If you take a Knight from the AdMech codex, it doesn't have access to any of the Knight codex relics, warlord traits, or stratagems. The only reason to bother is ITC lets you take one Knight and still call yourself pure AdMech for faction ranking points. There's no in-game mechanical advantage to taking the Knight from the AdMech book instead of from the Knight codex. In 9th, it's very unlikely that there will be an additional CP cost if the detachment is from another codex, beyond the cost of the detachment itself.

Except multiple time it's been eluded to, also that would lead to odd situations where Guard taking a Banblade costs the same CP as adding an Imperial Knight.

I genuinely believe that the detachment will cost CP and the codex will cost CP . Would also explain why Stu implied the CP cost of adding a Single knight depended on your main faction.

But I'll admit I have a bais in this as I'm fed up of GW nerfing Codex Imperial Knights for rules interactions caused by IG and Admech allies.

Ice

What’s your current mono knights setup?

I’m a Taranis player and would love to be able to play codex imperial knights.

The reason I soup and have done is due to the following

1. Nearly everyone souped from day 1 and as a result we got slammed with stratagem points hikes. I remember trying mono dex around this time and found it impossible once strats like Our darkest hour. Order of companions, the missile strat(who’s name escapes me just now) all got bumped up. We just don’t have the CP to function as an army - this looks to be addressed in 9th hopefully

2. No screen and knights fold like paper (except for sanctuary and armour of the sainted ion. And even then they go down to rocksaws, centurions, sang guard etc. Let alone anyone with ranged AT

3. Low model count and the auto lose on objectives.

We seemed priced higher than we should be in my eyes. Our units aren’t actually that survivable and the damage output isn’t competitive to what quite a few other armies can do. I know that’s probably controversial but what armies these days aren’t stacking enough anti tank to make William Tecumseh Sherman weep.

I’m not entirely convinced we’ve got a rosey future in the next edition but I’m trying to stay positive and hope

Any tricks you’ve got for making 1 faction knights work?

Running 2 detachments, FW knights helped a lot before they got nerfed.

3 Questorus Class
Crusader Thermal
2 Galants
House Krast

1 Crusader Thermal
1 Warglaive
1 Moriax twin Lightning locks
House Mortan

3 Ironstom pods I've tried moving them around as it depends if your likely to face flyer spam or not.

Really though you have to except your loosing 1 knight turn 1 every game, sometimes it's two and you normally loose those games.

Raven guard Centurions and Blood angles are horrible match ups but you just have to choose knights you can lose and position as best you can.
GSC I don't have any real experience against, I think you just go as hard as you can and hopefully put enough damage down to be able to limp across the line.

Yeah the weapons are painfully overcosted whoever priced a RFBC obviously never looked at the IG codex, they are also all over the place when you look at the choas knights Codex aswell.

Esentially to have a representative damage output you need to be making shooting and CC work.
You

On an unrelated note, I just realized the implications of the new blast rules for the Preceptor: the low-intensity shot is an Avenger Gatling Cannon against hordes at a 20pt discount. The blast rules are going to apply to (most) ranged, non-flamer, random shot weapons. This would do a bunch of weird stuff to the balance of the weapons. The Avenger is still best against units of 10 or less, but the Battlecannon becomes top of the heap against hordes (although significantly more expensive). Of course, the Battlecannon is still god-awful against tanks. The Las-impulsor will have to come up in points since it also hits vehicles almost as hard as the Thermal Cannon.

Actually, let me do the math:

vs hordes: Battlecannon (6.7) >= Las = Avenger (T3 6.7 or T4 5.4) > Thermal (3.3)

vs MEQ: Avenger (3.6) > Battlecannon (2.6) > Las (2.1) > Thermal (1.9)

vs T8 3+: Thermal (7.1 at 18" or 5.5 at 36" ) > Las (5.5) > Battlecannon = Avenger (3.5)

Man, even with the blast rules the Battlecannon is incredible garbage. It is mostly equal to the Avenger, so you're paying 25 points for an overkill of extra range. Looking at this spread, the weapons all seem pretty balanced with each other. It would make sense for the point discrepancy between them to shrink. The Avenger and the Thermal should probably be the cheapest, since they're the most specialized. The Las-impulsor and Battlecannon should pay a small cost for versatility and range respectively, though it should be small since both are rarely the best.

 Ideasweasel wrote:
Ice

What’s your current mono knights setup?

I’m a Taranis player and would love to be able to play codex imperial knights.

The reason I soup and have done is due to the following

1. Nearly everyone souped from day 1 and as a result we got slammed with stratagem points hikes. I remember trying mono dex around this time and found it impossible once strats like Our darkest hour. Order of companions, the missile strat(who’s name escapes me just now) all got bumped up. We just don’t have the CP to function as an army - this looks to be addressed in 9th hopefully

2. No screen and knights fold like paper (except for sanctuary and armour of the sainted ion. And even then they go down to rocksaws, centurions, sang guard etc. Let alone anyone with ranged AT

3. Low model count and the auto lose on objectives.

We seemed priced higher than we should be in my eyes. Our units aren’t actually that survivable and the damage output isn’t competitive to what quite a few other armies can do. I know that’s probably controversial but what armies these days aren’t stacking enough anti tank to make William Tecumseh Sherman weep.

I’m not entirely convinced we’ve got a rosey future in the next edition but I’m trying to stay positive and hope

Any tricks you’ve got for making 1 faction knights work?

points 2 and 3 still stand so point 1 will carry over to the new edition althought unless theres preferencial treatment to admech guard will be your only ally as creed gives a CP rebate

As to tricks play mono knights the best tactic is remove the word mono. The only exception is if you are playing team formats like the ETC where skew lists are part of the format and then I would build a list focussed on crusaders with thermal cannons and hope your captain matchs you with a vehicle heavy list. In a solo event there isnt an easy way to ignore objectives and the ability to screen and win.

Things may change in ninth but the rules arnt all out yet.

I'm not going to say your not pretty much on the money from a game play perspective, however Knight's might gain on the objectives game if the detachment changes and the lack of hordes mean your less likely to be competing for ovjectives against 30 ork boys or 20 Guard.

Oh holding an objective with a impulse or some bikers are you move shoot, charge kill and mine now.

The secondary being tailerable and a few other changes do mean your not quite as behind on the score card as 8th missions also GW seems to have learned that HQ only or FS only scoring objectives wad a terrible game design space to enter.

I was debating buying a castigator. With the detatchment rules just spoiled I will not. 6CP just isn't viable

U02dah4 wrote:
I was debating buying a castigator. With the detatchment rules just spoiled I will not. 6CP just isn't viable

They also say you can get it refunded. I suspect the knightly rule allowing you to make one a CHARACTER will let you get CP refunds for your warlord's detachment in the same way as a normal battalion.

Seriously could they have said less?

That was the most useless faction focus artical yet.
Super heavy detachements cost 3 cp aslong as it doesnt include titanic units but 6 if it includes 1 or more?

Hopefully they don't duck it up and make the Knight lance rule apply to allies aswell, this time.

Also what's this nonsense about when your in engagement range you can use your Traitors Pyre.

I really hope we aren't loosing falling back or the army will be seriously mono build.


P.S. just looked up the sally forth strategum in the codex and for 3CP you can outflank 1 Questor Imperialus questorus Knight or 1 unit of armigers for 3CP, now assuming powerlevel doesnt change both alligences can do it for 1CP per Armiger and 3 per Questorus, potentially less CP than that strategum without having to be Imperial alligence. well done GW.

Well chaos knights artical confirms Ironstorm pods are blast weapons as well as thermal spears. That does mean that so far knights are not shooting into combat with 90% of their weapons, unless they get a rule to do so.

But your warlord gives you 3CP if Armiger and 6CP if Titanic.

Mono knights seem viable in 9th but I suspect patrol detachment of allies for 2CP isnt going to be uncommon.

A supporting detachment is always worth a look for skirmish screens, objective holders, smash characters, psychic protection,
Whatever , but now you'll only want it if you actually WANT those units, not just as a command point battery to fuel lightly strategems....

Yup, that was my revision. Cut one tank out of my AdMech to bring it down to a Patrol (which I probably would have to do anyway with the point increases) and make my Knight the Warlord. It costs 2 CP for the patrol and 2 CP for AdMech Warlord traits. Assuming a roughly 15% point increase, my 1500 list gains an extra 3 CP over the course of the game. Beyond that, I'd probably pay 1 more CP to make it a Battalion to bring third tank and more infantry (in addition to more Armigers).

That's about how I expect the meta to shake out in general. A single Knight is going to need a Warlord trait and/or Relic, so end up 4 or 5 CP. Additional detachments in general will probably be 2 CP patrols with 2 or 3 CP of pre-game Stratagems, so it's actually a pretty even trade. Of course, now anything more than a single Knight will demand the Knights be the main detachment. Armigers look really good for filling required slots.

There will also be a soup tax in CP from the sounds of it...

I hear certain people saying that, but I don't know why GW would. I find it very unlikely it'll actually happen. As it stands, Chaos and Tyranids have to take allies from technically different books. Ynnari also rely on other codexes. It would cripple those factions, and for what? At this point, taking any additional detachments is a huge commitment. Nobody's going to splash token fragments of other factions to cherry-pick the best individual units because the sum will end up starved for command points.

A patrol costs 2cp - that's hardly crippling is it? I think the numbers have wiggle room for a further tax, consdering a Knight SHD backed up by a BA patrol will give you 10+5cp without an explicit soup tax.

That would be terrible for the game..