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.

Sgt Harker = equivalent 3+ bs, give or take.

Martel732 wrote:
Shadowswords I've been seeing are vostroyan with the stupid buff tank. That's 3+ rerollable.

There's nothing wrong with hitting on 4+ if the price is right.

I don’t normally agree with you, but I do here

 Crimson wrote:

 Elbows wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
Having relics to not cost points was a terrible idea from the get-go, this is just an extreme example of that.

Free relics normally isn't a big deal, but they simply never consider scaling in this game. They're fine when they're minor and almost trivial on a normal character - but scaled up to bonuses to Knight weapons, it's completely out of whack.

Even with relics with less impact there are usually one of two which are always taken, and others might as well not exist. With points you could at least address that by making the worse relics cheaper.

There are many relics I wouldn’t take even if they cost me negative points to run. I don’t think that’s the solution here

Martel732 wrote:
Shadowswords I've been seeing are vostroyan with the stupid buff tank. That's 3+ rerollable.

There's nothing wrong with hitting on 4+ if the price is right.

Where are you getting rerollable?

That makes the SS & Salamander combo about 680 points and it's still prone to death from a Castellan turn 1.

A shadowsword and a Castellan are not even nearly on the same level.

A shadowsword can delete no more than one target per turn (and even there, against something non titanic with an invul save like a flyrant, it fails more than it should for that cost).
A castellan simply pushed all mid/heavy vehicles out of the meta, since it can take out 2 of them per turn quite easily, while ALSO making a mess of your elite infantry.

Salamander doesn't give re-rolls, it gives plus 1 to shooting rolls till end of phase.

Secondly, while this does give you a larger chance of doing damage, you are still dedicating almost half your list to a anti-titan vehicle that will get CC'd on turn 2 and be useless for the rest of the game, if it doesn't get deleted on turn 1.

No invuln means all those -4AP weapons make you go bye bye very quick. Hell, I can delete you with three Lehman Russ, for less points, more mobility, survivability, and options.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Interesting topic for debate:

Give the Baneblade and all variants a 5++. No change in points. Thoughts?

Or a 6+++, call it "Reflective Plating" and on a 6+ the wound is ignored. Right now as a superheavy it needs an invuln or something.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Salamander doesn't give re-rolls, it gives plus 1 to shooting rolls till end of phase.

Secondly, while this does give you a larger chance of doing damage, you are still dedicating almost half your list to a anti-titan vehicle that will get CC'd on turn 2 and be useless for the rest of the game, if it doesn't get deleted on turn 1.

No invuln means all those -4AP weapons make you go bye bye very quick. Hell, I can delete you with three Lehman Russ, for less points, more mobility, survivability, and options.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Interesting topic for debate:

Give the Baneblade and all variants a 5++. No change in points. Thoughts?

Or a 6+++, call it "Reflective Plating" and on a 6+ the wound is ignored. Right now as a superheavy it needs an invuln or something.

Any additional rules needs a points increase.

Pain4Pleasure wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Salamander doesn't give re-rolls, it gives plus 1 to shooting rolls till end of phase.

Secondly, while this does give you a larger chance of doing damage, you are still dedicating almost half your list to a anti-titan vehicle that will get CC'd on turn 2 and be useless for the rest of the game, if it doesn't get deleted on turn 1.

No invuln means all those -4AP weapons make you go bye bye very quick. Hell, I can delete you with three Lehman Russ, for less points, more mobility, survivability, and options.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Interesting topic for debate:

Give the Baneblade and all variants a 5++. No change in points. Thoughts?

Or a 6+++, call it "Reflective Plating" and on a 6+ the wound is ignored. Right now as a superheavy it needs an invuln or something.

Any additional rules needs a points increase.

Don't just post GIFs as a response.

I don't think it would be bad for the IG super heavy tank brigade to get something to help them. a universal 6+++ would be find and help them.

Additionally I think some stratagems and specific traits wouldn't be out of place. And a Relic or two, not to mention the ability to have a Warlord Super Heavy, with some traits.

Stop adding layers and layers of FNP and invuls that make anti tank weaponry useless. If you want more resilient tanks give them more wounds.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Salamander doesn't give re-rolls, it gives plus 1 to shooting rolls till end of phase.

Secondly, while this does give you a larger chance of doing damage, you are still dedicating almost half your list to a anti-titan vehicle that will get CC'd on turn 2 and be useless for the rest of the game, if it doesn't get deleted on turn 1.

No invuln means all those -4AP weapons make you go bye bye very quick. Hell, I can delete you with three Lehman Russ, for less points, more mobility, survivability, and options.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Interesting topic for debate:

Give the Baneblade and all variants a 5++. No change in points. Thoughts?

Or a 6+++, call it "Reflective Plating" and on a 6+ the wound is ignored. Right now as a superheavy it needs an invuln or something.

Any additional rules needs a points increase.

Don't just post GIFs as a response.

Oof someone is but at least you didn’t go all CAPS MODE on us again. Special rules, wounds, saves, toughness etc should always determine points. Want more resiliency? Cost more points. And as said above.. stop trying to make anti tank weaponry useless. If you are really that upset my skyweavers destroy anything you have in one turn.. idk, complain to GW I guess?

The idea is that, relative to other models, the Baneblade chassis isn't as good, so can be buffed without increasing points.

Let me put it this way-if I proposed giving all Tactical Marines +1 Attack, do you think it should come with a points increase?

But the baneblade chassis is as good. It only droped out of favour after the Imperial Knight codex that had the most busted superheavies of the game.

Compare the baneblade with every other superheavy and they are far superior.

 Galas wrote:
But the baneblade chassis is as good. It only droped out of favour after the Imperial Knight codex that had the most busted superheavies of the game.

Compare the baneblade with every other superheavy and they are far superior.

I was pointing out what the idea was. I never said I agreed with it.

I feel like Baneblades are a good superheavy, but not a broken one. (Maybe the Shadowsword, but certainly not most of the variants.) They're vulnerable to high AP weapons and mortal wounds, but still pretty beastly.

The Castellan just was (and might still be) a vastly superior choice-so, relative to the TOURNAMENT META, you could buff Baneblades without increasing the points cost. Whether or not that's a GOOD IDEA... Well, I'd say it's not.

How bout we all get along and have a group cuddle?

Ok, rather than move the Baneblade UP to the Castellan, which is the current place holder for top Superheavy in the game, 3 years running, how about we drop the Castellan down to the level of other Superheavies? Castellan loses it's invuln. Now it costs more still, but it still has way better shooting, way better defenses, movement, melee, and stratagems.

lol It's already nerfed too much, you want it to lose it's invul?

How would it have better defences?

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Ok, rather than move the Baneblade UP to the Castellan, which is the current place holder for top Superheavy in the game, 3 years running, how about we drop the Castellan down to the level of other Superheavies?

Ah, hyperbole - here I was thinking we might go a day without it on here.

How can a model released in 2018 - less than 12 months ago - have been top of the tree for three years running?

 Dysartes wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Ok, rather than move the Baneblade UP to the Castellan, which is the current place holder for top Superheavy in the game, 3 years running, how about we drop the Castellan down to the level of other Superheavies?

Ah, hyperbole - here I was thinking we might go a day without it on here.

How can a model released in 2018 - less than 12 months ago - have been top of the tree for three years running?

Don't bring facts to this argument all the cool kids want knights removed from 40k.

The fact that not a single knights primary list that I've ever seen place has had a Castellen is also irrelevant.

Though that people believe that the guard codex needs buffed with invulnerable saves is laughable poorly balanced.

Removed - BrookM

At the end of the day the Castellan will still se play but as a balanced unit it won't appear anymore (Or maybe, I'm not a guru, this is my impresion) in the top tables because by definition the lists that reach top tables are the strongest of the game, not middle of the road ones.

The point increase was not elegant. The issue was Cawl's Wrath (get rid of it) and House Raven. Get rid of the strat of make strats not accessible in aux slot. Or keep Cawl's Wrath and make relics not accessible in the aux slot, either.

Martel732 wrote:
The point increase was not elegant. The issue was Cawl's Wrath (get rid of it) and House Raven. Get rid of the strat of make strats not accessible in aux slot. Or keep Cawl's Wrath and make relics not accessible in the aux slot, either.

Oh my sweet summer child. Those things were only a problem because it was hard to destroy. Now it can be removed reliably in a single turn. It will struggle to ever earn it's points back.

Earning points back is not always the standard of analysis.

Furthermore, non-Raven Castellans are all unfairly suffering because of a single build that was only ever taken as an aux choice.

4++ is not that much worse than 3++. You still won't be able to melee it. It's still T8. It can still fire on bottom bracket as if it were on top. The Raven strat is still a problem.

There plenty of lists than can't remove T8 W28 with NO invuln in one turn. So I don't really agree with your analysis at all.

I think you're showing a lack of experience here. The 3++ in combination with key strats made the Knight almost invulnerable.

A 4++ Knight is easy to destroy if you need to do so. I've done it, it's been done to me. My Castellan was removed from play on turn 1 in the last game I played a few days ago.

It's not lack of experience. It's math. Learn some. There's not that big of a difference between 3++ and 4++.

You're playing in some very friendly meta lol. I've faced armies that teleport in 25 Hellblasters for 50 plasma shots with re rolls, or fire 20+ Lascannons, or 20+ dark lances a turn.

I think you do lack experience actually. Very much so.

Martel732 wrote:
It's not lack of experience. It's math. Learn some. There's not that big of a difference between 3++ and 4++.

Well...66% up from 50% is a 33% increase in durability...

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
It's not lack of experience. It's math. Learn some. There's not that big of a difference between 3++ and 4++.

Well...66% up from 50% is a 33% increase in durability...

And there were strats to play to mitigate failed rolls. The invul nerf was a big deal. As was the point increase. You are giving up substantial resources from the rest of your list in one 700+ point model that cannot hide and might never shoot.

I said it was inelegant. I didn't say it wasn't going to work. It's certainly unfair to non-Raven Castellans.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ishagu wrote:
You're playing in some very friendly meta lol. I've faced armies that teleport in 25 Hellblasters for 50 plasma shots with re rolls, or fire 20+ Lascannons, or 20+ dark lances a turn.

I think you do lack experience actually. Very much so.

Sounds like an extreme skew to smoke castellans to me.