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.

 Lobukia wrote:

 Hawky wrote:

Capping invulnerable save at 5+ (infantry) and 4+ (vehicles), not more.

What would you do with storm shields (pretending people still use units with these)

Reroll armor/invuln save or +1 armor save, perhaps.

 Lobukia wrote:

 Hawky wrote:

Capping invulnerable save at 5+ (infantry) and 4+ (vehicles), not more.

What would you do with storm shields (pretending people still use units with these)

What are these deathwatch veterans with SB/SS?

tneva82 wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:

 Hawky wrote:

Capping invulnerable save at 5+ (infantry) and 4+ (vehicles), not more.

What would you do with storm shields (pretending people still use units with these)

What are these deathwatch veterans with SB/SS?

SS for 2 pts...

 Lobukia wrote:

 Hawky wrote:

Capping invulnerable save at 5+ (infantry) and 4+ (vehicles), not more.

What would you do with storm shields (pretending people still use units with these)

This is a HORRID suggestion. Storm Shields exist and some armies (like Harlequins) are designed around having 4++ across the board. Capping Invuls at 5++ would make Haries unplayable (like they were in 7E)
I do not feel that a blanket rule can apply fairly to all Invuls. It's better to just address the biggest abusers and make weapons a bit more reliable.

Several changes that would help off the bat would be: Cap Knight Invuls to 4++, revamp multi-damage weapons to do more than just D6 or D3.
Lascannons would be far more reliable is they were D3+2 damage instead of D6, for example.
It would make those instances in which they get through the Invul actually matter.

Same with Melta. Instead of 2d6 at half range taking the highest, it could be 2d6 total at half range, so even D6+3 at half. We could even ditch the whole "at half range" and just give all Meltas 2D6 damage against Vehicles & Monsters.
And Multimeltas should have D3 shots, not just 1.

Make weapons that are SUPPOSED to be good against large targets actually reliable, and getting through Invuls isn't so bad (because you WILL for more damage when you do)
Combine with capping certain models invuls and you fix the issue

-

 Lobukia wrote:


no... just the opposite... you're making my point

....What point is that?

The current situation is that elite armies ally in cheap battalions and typically run with 13CP (their own more expensive battalion and the allied el cheapo battalion)

While the hordier armies run Brigades and ally in low-CP elite allied detachments, and typically run with 15CP.

This tends to be fundamentally unfair favoring the armies that can run the brigades, as they have more CP and typically more flexibility in what they can take because they don't need to take 3 expensive troops and 2 expensive HQs to get close to parity.

And you want to create a situation where the elite armies will have their battalion and run with 8CP

and the cheap armies will run a brigade and have 15.

And this is...

fixed?

Not Online!!! wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:

 Hawky wrote:

Capping invulnerable save at 5+ (infantry) and 4+ (vehicles), not more.

What would you do with storm shields (pretending people still use units with these)

What are these deathwatch veterans with SB/SS?

SS for 2 pts...

SS for 2pts isn't what you should focus on. 20ppm StormVets that die just a fast a regular Tac Marines to small arms fire (which there is a tons of out there) is how that balances out. 2-3ppm is about right for SSs on non-Characters. Anymore and why bother

-

But Castellans need to pay hundreds of points and CP *per model* for a 3++!

Shouldn't the same wargear cost the same on every model?

 Galef wrote:
stuff

Good point. I agree. Vanquisher Tank is a prime example of this.

I'm not a big fan of high invulnerable saves. I still think that for infantry, 5+ invuln should be the norm, with an exception here and there. But on vehicles, it's a horrible thing to get through. Especially Tau, that have 3+ invuln easily accessible.

Haha, you hit me with your strongest weapon but it did nothing, because I'm invulnerable, cause space magic shields, haha, now I kill you with 3D3 S9 AP-4 3D auto hit supermegaawesomeplasmaflamers, haha.
That thing...

Bharring wrote:

Shouldn't the same wargear cost the same on every model?

Absolutely not.

Lets really discuss all the cost in a Castellan getting 3+.

A detachment.
604 points.
1 CP pre game to give the Castellan a Warlord Trait to have the 4++
3 CP each time you want to have a 3++ in game for a shooting phase.

As a pure knight player at times, the Castellan is already useless. I wish I hadn't bought the model and saved the money for a Cerastus knight. And then we have the well intention-ed but poorly informed that want to make it worse.

Reemule wrote:
Lets really discuss all the cost in a Castellan getting 3+.

A detachment.
604 points.
1 CP pre game to give the Castellan a Warlord Trait to have the 4++
3 CP each time you want to have a 3++ in game for a shooting phase.

As a pure knight player at times, the Castellan is already useless. I wish I hadn't bought the model and saved the money for a Cerastus knight. And then we have the well intention-ed but poorly informed that want to make it worse.

Yeah no - you are doing it wrong. Make the Castellan your warlord and give him the free relic plasma cannon. Take 2 armigers if you must to complete the detachment and for a knight lance and get army traits. Or If you must. Take 2 more knights. You also have to be smart about spending 3 CP to go to 3++. Realistically they can't kill your knight even with a 4++ so bait them into shooting it take some damage on it. Then fight at full power for 1 Freaking CP. At this point you've already won. No army can handle 2 turns of full knight firepower if they don't kill something. Because turn 2-3 you have 3 titans in CC and being unstoppable. Smart players don't even shoot the Castellan - it's a waste.

How can you say something so absurd as to say a Castellan is useless? Apart from Mortarian - the only model I'd never bring to a casual game.

Adding to the durability suggestions here, would a system that reduces damage taken by under-strenght weapon be a good solution ? Anti-tank weaponry would be amped up accordingly.

For example:

Let's have a humble Rhino, T7, 10W, 3+ save. We could give him an "Armour Value" of 2, meaning it reduces every damage inflicted by weapons under S7 by 2, with no minimum. So with the actual weapon profiles we have to start shooting with an Autocannon to inflict damage, as it is S7 (same as T7). All of a sudden you can't just saturate your way through its T7 with lots of weaker weapons and things like Disintegrator Cannons or Heavy Bolters become useless.

Alternatively if it proves too powerful we can make it like a weapon that wounds on a 5+ against the armoured target ignores the Armour Value on a 6 to wound. It half the effectiveness while still allowing an army that has no more anti-tank weaponry to deal with it.

We could give this system to all Monstrous Creatures and Vehicles, with different Armour Values depending on the model. That way it encourages people to have actual anti-tank weaponry and not just rely on saturation for every target they encounter. Of course accordingly we'd have to adjust actual anti-tank weaponry so that they deal way more damage, like instead of 1d6 D for a Lascannon we'd have minimum 3 up to 6 like a Neutron laser. And reward Melta users for being in half-range like suggested earlier with better reliability.

 Hawky wrote:

 Galef wrote:
stuff

Good point. I agree. Vanquisher Tank is a prime example of this.

I'm not a big fan of high invulnerable saves. I still think that for infantry, 5+ invuln should be the norm, with an exception here and there. But on vehicles, it's a horrible thing to get through. Especially Tau, that have 3+ invuln easily accessible.

Haha, you hit me with your strongest weapon but it did nothing, because I'm invulnerable, cause space magic shields, haha, now I kill you with 3D3 S9 AP-4 3D auto hit supermegaawesomeplasmaflamers, haha.
That thing...

I'm sorry what? Someone lied to you about what their Y'Vahra does. Not a single one of those statements is true. Next time make them show you the stats in the index via a legit digital or physical copy. 3++ invulns are actually pretty hard to get for Tau without massively gimping your firepower with stupid nova charges or taking overcosted shield drones on Shadowsun/FW Riptide Variants. (which cannot use the Branched Nova Charge Strategem and cost as much as a knight with half the wounds) Edit: A single riptide can upgrade both its guns and shields for 1cp during the Tau players turn.

 Aaranis wrote:
Adding to the durability suggestions here, would a system that reduces damage taken by under-strenght weapon be a good solution ? Anti-tank weaponry would be amped up accordingly.

For example:

Let's have a humble Rhino, T7, 10W, 3+ save. We could give him an "Armour Value" of 2, meaning it reduces every damage inflicted by weapons under S7 by 2, with no minimum. So with the actual weapon profiles we have to start shooting with an Autocannon to inflict damage, as it is S7 (same as T7). All of a sudden you can't just saturate your way through its T7 with lots of weaker weapons and things like Disintegrator Cannons or Heavy Bolters become useless.

Alternatively if it proves too powerful we can make it like a weapon that wounds on a 5+ against the armoured target ignores the Armour Value on a 6 to wound. It half the effectiveness while still allowing an army that has no more anti-tank weaponry to deal with it.

We could give this system to all Monstrous Creatures and Vehicles, with different Armour Values depending on the model. That way it encourages people to have actual anti-tank weaponry and not just rely on saturation for every target they encounter. Of course accordingly we'd have to adjust actual anti-tank weaponry so that they deal way more damage, like instead of 1d6 D for a Lascannon we'd have minimum 3 up to 6 like a Neutron laser. And reward Melta users for being in half-range like suggested earlier with better reliability.

This might work if the only factions in the game were Imperium.

Drager wrote:
This might work if the only factions in the game were Imperium.

I don't see why it would ? It could be used by every Vehicle/MC, the downside is that they'd have to rewrite all supposedly anti-tank weapons for reliable damage.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Reemule wrote:
Lets really discuss all the cost in a Castellan getting 3+.

A detachment.
604 points.
1 CP pre game to give the Castellan a Warlord Trait to have the 4++
3 CP each time you want to have a 3++ in game for a shooting phase.

As a pure knight player at times, the Castellan is already useless. I wish I hadn't bought the model and saved the money for a Cerastus knight. And then we have the well intention-ed but poorly informed that want to make it worse.

Yeah no - you are doing it wrong. Make the Castellan your warlord and give him the free relic plasma cannon. Take 2 armigers if you must to complete the detachment and for a knight lance and get army traits. Or If you must. Take 2 more knights. You also have to be smart about spending 3 CP to go to 3++. Realistically they can't kill your knight even with a 4++ so bait them into shooting it take some damage on it. Then fight at full power for 1 Freaking CP. At this point you've already won. No army can handle 2 turns of full knight firepower if they don't kill something. Because turn 2-3 you have 3 titans in CC and being unstoppable. Smart players don't even shoot the Castellan - it's a waste.

How can you say something so absurd as to say a Castellan is useless? Apart from Mortarian - the only model I'd never bring to a casual game.

Wait you think a 4++ and a turn of fighting at full power with a knight is a win? Man, your anti knight prejudges is on full display. Rein in your bias a little and work on gaining some perspective, to have some ability to see the middle.

The castellan is a powerful piece. So is all the knights. And when I have 9 CP spending 1/3rd my total to RIS one, isn't smart, or effective, when I can RIS others for a single CP.

 Galef wrote:

SS for 2pts isn't what you should focus on. 20ppm StormVets that die just a fast a regular Tac Marines to small arms fire (which there is a tons of out there) is how that balances out. 2-3ppm is about right for SSs on non-Characters. Anymore and why bother

-

Reemule wrote:
Wait you think a 4++ and a turn of fighting at full power with a knight is a win? Man, your anti knight prejudges is on full display. Rein in your bias a little and work on gaining some perspective, to have some ability to see the middle.

The castellan is a powerful piece. So is all the knights. And when I have 9 CP spending 1/3rd my total to RIS one, isn't smart, or effective, when I can RIS others for a single CP.

While I can certainly see your point, and agree with the "efficiency" of RIS on other Knights, Xenos isn't the only one with a bias here. As you seem to have played with a Castellan, you've probably seen it fail more than your opponents have, thus giving you a bias too.
But there is a good reason that the Castellan continues to show up in Imperial Soup lists over and over again. Often as the only Knight

-

Reemule wrote:


Wait you think a 4++ and a turn of fighting at full power with a knight is a win? Man, your anti knight prejudges is on full display. Rein in your bias a little and work on gaining some perspective, to have some ability to see the middle.

The castellan is a powerful piece. So is all the knights. And when I have 9 CP spending 1/3rd my total to RIS one, isn't smart, or effective, when I can RIS others for a single CP.

You have a very different view of how powerful the Castellan is and I would wager it is not shared by the very large majority of the community - not subjectively or objectively.

Reemule wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Reemule wrote:
Lets really discuss all the cost in a Castellan getting 3+.

A detachment.
604 points.
1 CP pre game to give the Castellan a Warlord Trait to have the 4++
3 CP each time you want to have a 3++ in game for a shooting phase.

As a pure knight player at times, the Castellan is already useless. I wish I hadn't bought the model and saved the money for a Cerastus knight. And then we have the well intention-ed but poorly informed that want to make it worse.

Yeah no - you are doing it wrong. Make the Castellan your warlord and give him the free relic plasma cannon. Take 2 armigers if you must to complete the detachment and for a knight lance and get army traits. Or If you must. Take 2 more knights. You also have to be smart about spending 3 CP to go to 3++. Realistically they can't kill your knight even with a 4++ so bait them into shooting it take some damage on it. Then fight at full power for 1 Freaking CP. At this point you've already won. No army can handle 2 turns of full knight firepower if they don't kill something. Because turn 2-3 you have 3 titans in CC and being unstoppable. Smart players don't even shoot the Castellan - it's a waste.

How can you say something so absurd as to say a Castellan is useless? Apart from Mortarian - the only model I'd never bring to a casual game.

Wait you think a 4++ and a turn of fighting at full power with a knight is a win? Man, your anti knight prejudges is on full display. Rein in your bias a little and work on gaining some perspective, to have some ability to see the middle.

The castellan is a powerful piece. So is all the knights. And when I have 9 CP spending 1/3rd my total to RIS one, isn't smart, or effective, when I can RIS others for a single CP.

It sounds like you are playing mono-knights? Most of the complaints about Castellans are from souping them in with excess CP from IG and other threats besides the Castellan.

Reemule wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Reemule wrote:
Lets really discuss all the cost in a Castellan getting 3+.

A detachment.
604 points.
1 CP pre game to give the Castellan a Warlord Trait to have the 4++
3 CP each time you want to have a 3++ in game for a shooting phase.

As a pure knight player at times, the Castellan is already useless. I wish I hadn't bought the model and saved the money for a Cerastus knight. And then we have the well intention-ed but poorly informed that want to make it worse.

Yeah no - you are doing it wrong. Make the Castellan your warlord and give him the free relic plasma cannon. Take 2 armigers if you must to complete the detachment and for a knight lance and get army traits. Or If you must. Take 2 more knights. You also have to be smart about spending 3 CP to go to 3++. Realistically they can't kill your knight even with a 4++ so bait them into shooting it take some damage on it. Then fight at full power for 1 Freaking CP. At this point you've already won. No army can handle 2 turns of full knight firepower if they don't kill something. Because turn 2-3 you have 3 titans in CC and being unstoppable. Smart players don't even shoot the Castellan - it's a waste.

How can you say something so absurd as to say a Castellan is useless? Apart from Mortarian - the only model I'd never bring to a casual game.

Wait you think a 4++ and a turn of fighting at full power with a knight is a win? Man, your anti knight prejudges is on full display. Rein in your bias a little and work on gaining some perspective, to have some ability to see the middle.

The castellan is a powerful piece. So is all the knights. And when I have 9 CP spending 1/3rd my total to RIS one, isn't smart, or effective, when I can RIS others for a single CP.

I play knights dude.

I've never lost with this list. I think it's 12-0 right now and won 3 locals. Tabled every single opponent. I have no idea why I didn't just bring this to LVO. I think I was concerned about psychic powers.

Gman (warlord)

Loyal 32

(Tyranis)
Castellan
Crusader Thermal Melta + Ironstorm
Gallant

I'm not bragging btw. I'm just saying I feel bad beating people with the Castellan and with knights in general. You are sitting here calling it useless. I find it absolutely absurd. It's almost as bad as Eldar defending SS all edition.

Bharring wrote:
But Castellans need to pay hundreds of points and CP *per model* for a 3++!

Shouldn't the same wargear cost the same on every model?

Hells no.
The more wounds it has the more chances that Invulnerable save will actually work.

Infantry with one or two wounds fail one save and more often than not die so they pay 2ppm and never actually get use out of it..
Characters and TWC have three or more wounds so usually two fails will end them and their shields cost 10ppm, I think TWC got ripped off but I play Space Wolves so I'm biased.
Dreadnoughts got dropped back to 4++ saves because their eight wounds were seeing genuine value from a 40ppm 3++ shield.
So let's talk about a 3++ save on an Imperial Knight at twenty eight wounds.
Three wounds to five wounds jumped five times, five wounds to eight wounds jumped four times and dropped to a 4++ but let's play fair and pretend it's still a 3++.
Assuming this actually follows an order eight wounds to twelve wounds is the next jump and it goes up three times to 120 ppm.
Then twelve to seventeen for a double jump hitting 240ppm for a 3++ save.
So, do we leave it at that because it's only against shooty threats or double it again from seventeen to twenty four and see where we go from there?

Castellan is manageable without Raven. Full stop. Does that clear it up?

You guys must roll a lot of 1's to wound. Like a lot. Plus have probably never experienced tyranis knights. LOL

 Xenomancers wrote:

Reemule wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Reemule wrote:
Lets really discuss all the cost in a Castellan getting 3+.

A detachment.
604 points.
1 CP pre game to give the Castellan a Warlord Trait to have the 4++
3 CP each time you want to have a 3++ in game for a shooting phase.

As a pure knight player at times, the Castellan is already useless. I wish I hadn't bought the model and saved the money for a Cerastus knight. And then we have the well intention-ed but poorly informed that want to make it worse.

Yeah no - you are doing it wrong. Make the Castellan your warlord and give him the free relic plasma cannon. Take 2 armigers if you must to complete the detachment and for a knight lance and get army traits. Or If you must. Take 2 more knights. You also have to be smart about spending 3 CP to go to 3++. Realistically they can't kill your knight even with a 4++ so bait them into shooting it take some damage on it. Then fight at full power for 1 Freaking CP. At this point you've already won. No army can handle 2 turns of full knight firepower if they don't kill something. Because turn 2-3 you have 3 titans in CC and being unstoppable. Smart players don't even shoot the Castellan - it's a waste.

How can you say something so absurd as to say a Castellan is useless? Apart from Mortarian - the only model I'd never bring to a casual game.

Wait you think a 4++ and a turn of fighting at full power with a knight is a win? Man, your anti knight prejudges is on full display. Rein in your bias a little and work on gaining some perspective, to have some ability to see the middle.

The castellan is a powerful piece. So is all the knights. And when I have 9 CP spending 1/3rd my total to RIS one, isn't smart, or effective, when I can RIS others for a single CP.

I play knights dude.

I've never lost with this list. I think it's 12-0 right now and won 3 locals. Tabled every single opponent. I have no idea why I didn't just bring this to LVO. I think I was concerned about psychic powers.

Gman (warlord)

Loyal 32

(Tyranis)
Castellan
Crusader Thermal Melta + Ironstorm
Gallant

I'm not bragging btw. I'm just saying I feel bad beating people with the Castellan and with knights in general. You are sitting here calling it useless. I find it absolutely absurd. It's almost as bad as Eldar defending SS all edition.

I wish we could play as to me that looks like a super easy matchup for my current tournament list, but you might have a trick the knight players I've fought don't know about.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

Bharring wrote:
But Castellans need to pay hundreds of points and CP *per model* for a 3++!

Shouldn't the same wargear cost the same on every model?

Hells no.
The more wounds it has the more chances that Invulnerable save will actually work.

Infantry with one or two wounds fail one save and more often than not die so they pay 2ppm and never actually get use out of it..
Characters and TWC have three or more wounds so usually two fails will end them and their shields cost 10ppm, I think TWC got ripped off but I play Space Wolves so I'm biased.
Dreadnoughts got dropped back to 4++ saves because their eight wounds were seeing genuine value from a 40ppm 3++ shield.
So let's talk about a 3++ save on an Imperial Knight at twenty eight wounds.
Three wounds to five wounds jumped five times, five wounds to eight wounds jumped four times and dropped to a 4++ but let's play fair and pretend it's still a 3++.
Assuming this actually follows an order eight wounds to twelve wounds is the next jump and it goes up three times to 120 ppm.
Then twelve to seventeen for a double jump hitting 240ppm for a 3++ save.
So, do we leave it at that because it's only against shooty threats or double it again from seventeen to twenty four and see where we go from there?

I totally agree. I was trying to use this as a perfect example of *why* the same buff on two different units/models is certainly not worth the same.

The idea that an individual Marine and a several-hundred-point Knight can both get a 3++ is enough to prove it a bad idea.

The AT FAQ dropped this morning. Any chance we will see the CSM or BGFAQ today?

I am really getting tired of waiting on an answer for my Obliterators.

Whats your list? I mean - I'm beating tournament lists with it. You know tyranis knights come back to life right? So does Gman. It's a zombie list really. The only thing that scares it is CC bombs and 75% of the time even if they kill me I get back up and fight at full power. Gman gives all the knights reroll 1's too with a 12" aura.

GSC would absolutely pwn this but that is mostly because GSC powers are about to get nerfed because they are also absurd.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Togusa wrote:
The AT FAQ dropped this morning. Any chance we will see the CSM or BGFAQ today?

I am really getting tired of waiting on an answer for my Obliterators.

They will be 115. I rally wouldn't hold my breath on it ether.

You have more faith than I do. I'm worried death beam will be permanent. I mean Castellans have scared me off big stuff, but it sucks to get say, Dante death beamed. It's a cheap power and adds to the misery of 8th ed.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Reemule wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Reemule wrote:
Lets really discuss all the cost in a Castellan getting 3+.

A detachment.
604 points.
1 CP pre game to give the Castellan a Warlord Trait to have the 4++
3 CP each time you want to have a 3++ in game for a shooting phase.

As a pure knight player at times, the Castellan is already useless. I wish I hadn't bought the model and saved the money for a Cerastus knight. And then we have the well intention-ed but poorly informed that want to make it worse.

Yeah no - you are doing it wrong. Make the Castellan your warlord and give him the free relic plasma cannon. Take 2 armigers if you must to complete the detachment and for a knight lance and get army traits. Or If you must. Take 2 more knights. You also have to be smart about spending 3 CP to go to 3++. Realistically they can't kill your knight even with a 4++ so bait them into shooting it take some damage on it. Then fight at full power for 1 Freaking CP. At this point you've already won. No army can handle 2 turns of full knight firepower if they don't kill something. Because turn 2-3 you have 3 titans in CC and being unstoppable. Smart players don't even shoot the Castellan - it's a waste.

How can you say something so absurd as to say a Castellan is useless? Apart from Mortarian - the only model I'd never bring to a casual game.

Wait you think a 4++ and a turn of fighting at full power with a knight is a win? Man, your anti knight prejudges is on full display. Rein in your bias a little and work on gaining some perspective, to have some ability to see the middle.

The castellan is a powerful piece. So is all the knights. And when I have 9 CP spending 1/3rd my total to RIS one, isn't smart, or effective, when I can RIS others for a single CP.

I play knights dude.

I've never lost with this list. I think it's 12-0 right now and won 3 locals. Tabled every single opponent. I have no idea why I didn't just bring this to LVO. I think I was concerned about psychic powers.

Gman (warlord)

Loyal 32

(Tyranis)
Castellan
Crusader Thermal Melta + Ironstorm
Gallant

I'm not bragging btw. I'm just saying I feel bad beating people with the Castellan and with knights in general. You are sitting here calling it useless. I find it absolutely absurd. It's almost as bad as Eldar defending SS all edition.

Congratulations your balancing a codex based upon your use a a soup list.
Take away the 32 douche bags and then see how OP that list feels.