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.
Maybe a silly question but is there any way I can incorporate an Imperial knight into a UM army list without losing special UM rules or at all? If not i was thinking of starting a smaller Adeptus Mechanicus army could i include one in that - i really like these large models and looking for a way to fit one in - which model or type of Knight would be best suited to each if allowed - TIA
Not right now, if you break pure faction alignment at all in any way you lose faction rules. Single Knights might come back in 10th edition but given how annoyed everyone got at single Knight Imperial soup armies in 8th I don't expect they'll get another look in this edition.
Beaker07 wrote: Maybe a silly question but is there any way I can incorporate an Imperial knight into a UM army list without losing special UM rules or at all? If not i was thinking of starting a smaller Adeptus Mechanicus army could i include one in that - i really like these large models and looking for a way to fit one in - which model or type of Knight would be best suited to each if allowed - TIA
"Hey guys, that Knight is joining our battle group, I've forgotten how to ultramarine all of a sudden."
If Knights were actually truly point balanced, this wouldn't be an issue. But they're way to cheap for what they bring.
Beaker07 wrote: Maybe a silly question but is there any way I can incorporate an Imperial knight into a UM army list without losing special UM rules or at all? If not i was thinking of starting a smaller Adeptus Mechanicus army could i include one in that - i really like these large models and looking for a way to fit one in - which model or type of Knight would be best suited to each if allowed - TIA
"Hey guys, that Knight is joining our battle group, I've forgotten how to ultramarine all of a sudden."
If Knights were actually truly point balanced, this wouldn't be an issue. But they're way to cheap for what they bring.
I can get the losing super doctrines, sort of. When you're with only other Ultramarines you know what you can do and they know what you're thinking about doing. i.e. Ultramarines know they can fall back and shoot with other UM, but they might worry the Knight is going to shoot or move into the area they'd fall back into. Like I said, Sort of.
Togusa wrote: If Knights were actually truly point balanced, this wouldn't be an issue. But they're way to cheap for what they bring.
I like how people say 'balanced' when it's literally impossible. Even frakking Chess and Go aren't balanced and they have same pieces on both sides
But hey, I'll bite - how you'd "balance" the model so it's viable to field when it has a bonus to stats (all Knight army) and when it's actively detrimental (loss of super doctrines on all parts of the soup)? Literally the only way to do it would be to calculate its points dynamically on the fly depending on all other units in an army but I somehow don't see completely removing list building as an option unless you use official GW app to do so would be that popular...
Beaker07 wrote: Thanks for the info re Mechanicus allowing it just would like to build one and be able to use it
Honestly? Probably least problematic and easy way to do what you want would be to count Knights as SM units. Armigers as Contemptors, Knights as Redemptors. Redemptor is slightly smaller and weaker but pretty close and that way you wouldn't need any additional rule books or problems with soup. They even have similar loadouts so it won't be hard to stay pretty WYSIWYG if you so wish.
Togusa wrote: If Knights were actually truly point balanced, this wouldn't be an issue. But they're way to cheap for what they bring.
I like how people say 'balanced' when it's literally impossible. Even frakking Chess and Go aren't balanced and they have same pieces on both sides
But hey, I'll bite - how you'd "balance" the model so it's viable to field when it has a bonus to stats (all Knight army) and when it's actively detrimental (loss of super doctrines on all parts of the soup)? Literally the only way to do it would be to calculate its points dynamically on the fly depending on all other units in an army but I somehow don't see completely removing list building as an option unless you use official GW app to do so would be that popular...
Balanced doesn't mean "Every single possible permutation of every list has an equal chance of winning."
The exact definition is gonna vary person-to-person, but for me, to consider 40k balanced I'd want it to meet these benchmarks:
1) Every option has a use. There is nothing where it's never worth taking, and nothing that's always worth taking. It'll depend on the rest of your list, your strategy, all that.
2) A competently-built list is close to on par with a tournament-winning, super-optimized list.
3) The main determinant of victory in a game comes down to player skill.
The closer 40k gets to those benchmarks, the more balanced I'd say it is.
Spoiler:
For 1, I don't feel any more clarity is needed.
For 2, I would define "competently-built list" as a list built by someone who knows the rules well and has at least a couple games under their belt. But I'd really like to see it made so that if you build a bad list, it's really stonking obvious-if you take a Marine list of Chaplains, Drop Pods, and Servitors, it's gonna suck. But no one in their right mind would look at that and say "Yup, that's a good list!"
To give some numbers, if a tournament-optimized list goes up against a competently-built list, each piloted by a player of equal skill, I don't want to see the optimized list have more than a 60% win rate. Preferably closer to 55% or even 50%.
For 3, I would say that skill should be the prime determinant, barring exceptional luck (good or bad). If you fail five 4" charges, and that loses you the game even if you're the better player, it happens. But a 4" charge with no bonuses has a greater than 90% chance of success, so unless your dice are loaded to screw you, it wouldn't happen in most cases.
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
wuestenfux wrote: Contrary to the opinion above, you can run two factions (detachments) in a single army if they share the same keyword, here IMPERIUM.
you can, but in matched play you lose your faction purity bonuses
wuestenfux wrote: Contrary to the opinion above, you can run two factions (detachments) in a single army if they share the same keyword, here IMPERIUM.
you can, but in matched play you lose your faction purity bonuses
Not clear to me:
Suppose I have a battle-forged army, i.e. the army is organized so that all its units are in Detachments.
In a battle-forged army, all of the units in your army (except UNALIGNED) must have at least one Faction keyword in common (e.g. IMPERIUM) even if they are in different Detachments.
Let's talk about GK as I have the codex at hand.
In a battle-forged army, GK Detachments gain the Brotherhood ability, The Aegis ability, and Troops have objective secured.
So fielding another faction Detachment, say Imperial Knight, seems to be irrelevant here.
Former moderator 40kOnline
Lanchester's square law - please obey in list building!
Illumini: "And thank you for not finishing your post with a "" I'm sorry, but after 7200 's that has to be the most annoying sign-off ever."
wuestenfux wrote: Contrary to the opinion above, you can run two factions (detachments) in a single army if they share the same keyword, here IMPERIUM.
you can, but in matched play you lose your faction purity bonuses
Not clear to me:
Suppose I have a battle-forged army, i.e. the army is organized so that all its units are in Detachments.
In a battle-forged army, all of the units in your army (except UNALIGNED) must have at least one Faction keyword in common (e.g. IMPERIUM) even if they are in different Detachments.
Let's talk about GK as I have the codex at hand.
In a battle-forged army, GK Detachments gain the Brotherhood ability, The Aegis ability, and Troops have objective secured.
So fielding another faction Detachment, say Imperial Knight, seems to be irrelevant here.
If every unit from your army has the GREY KNIGHTS keyword (excluding AGENT OF THE IMPERIUM and UNALIGNED units), PSYKER units with this ability gain a bonus (see below) depending on which Tide of the Warp is dominant for your army, as follows.
you don't lose brotherhood, but you do lose your tides (which are your purity bonus)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/02/11 16:41:45
wuestenfux wrote: Contrary to the opinion above, you can run two factions (detachments) in a single army if they share the same keyword, here IMPERIUM.
you can, but in matched play you lose your faction purity bonuses
Not clear to me:
Suppose I have a battle-forged army, i.e. the army is organized so that all its units are in Detachments.
In a battle-forged army, all of the units in your army (except UNALIGNED) must have at least one Faction keyword in common (e.g. IMPERIUM) even if they are in different Detachments.
Let's talk about GK as I have the codex at hand.
In a battle-forged army, GK Detachments gain the Brotherhood ability, The Aegis ability, and Troops have objective secured.
So fielding another faction Detachment, say Imperial Knight, seems to be irrelevant here.
If every unit from your army has the GREY KNIGHTS keyword (excluding AGENT OF THE IMPERIUM and UNALIGNED units), PSYKER units with this ability gain a bonus (see below) depending on which Tide of the Warp is dominant for your army, as follows.
you don't lose brotherhood, but you do lose your tides (which are your purity bonus)
Agreed. Thanks for pointing out.
Former moderator 40kOnline
Lanchester's square law - please obey in list building!
Illumini: "And thank you for not finishing your post with a "" I'm sorry, but after 7200 's that has to be the most annoying sign-off ever."
I was hoping to be able tell you that you could do it by taking an Army of Faith on Crusade, but unfortunately, it just lets you take Marines + Sisters + Guard.
Quote "Honestly? Probably least problematic and easy way to do what you want would be to count Knights as SM units. Armigers as Contemptors, Knights as Redemptors. Redemptor is slightly smaller and weaker but pretty close and that way you wouldn't need any additional rule books or problems with soup. They even have similar loadouts so it won't be hard to stay pretty WYSIWYG if you so wish." Think I'll go with this if my GW manager goes with it - thanks for the suggestion
play narrative and boom play how you want it. ultramarines can stay ultramarines while you knight stays a knight.
I agree with it not working in matched play though it makes things super hard to balance. think back to the old loyal 32 plus 1 imperial knight castellan plus insert other imperial faciton lists that were so dominant for way to long
G00fySmiley wrote: play narrative and boom play how you want it. ultramarines can stay ultramarines while you knight stays a knight.
I agree with it not working in matched play though it makes things super hard to balance. think back to the old loyal 32 plus 1 imperial knight castellan plus insert other imperial faciton lists that were so dominant for way to long
The mono-faction rules don't care if you're playing Narrative or Matched. Even in Narrative you lose mono-faction rules for including Knights.
You know you're really doing something when you can make strangers hate you over the Internet. - Mauleed
Just remember folks. Panic. Panic all the time. It's the only way to survive, other than just being mindful, of course-but geez, that's so friggin' boring. - Aegis Grimm
Hallowed is the All Pie The Before Times: A Place That Celebrates The World That Was
wuestenfux wrote: Contrary to the opinion above, you can run two factions (detachments) in a single army if they share the same keyword, here IMPERIUM.
you can, but in matched play you lose your faction purity bonuses
Not clear to me:
Suppose I have a battle-forged army, i.e. the army is organized so that all its units are in Detachments.
In a battle-forged army, all of the units in your army (except UNALIGNED) must have at least one Faction keyword in common (e.g. IMPERIUM) even if they are in different Detachments.
Let's talk about GK as I have the codex at hand.
In a battle-forged army, GK Detachments gain the Brotherhood ability, The Aegis ability, and Troops have objective secured.
So fielding another faction Detachment, say Imperial Knight, seems to be irrelevant here.
If every unit from your army has the GREY KNIGHTS keyword (excluding AGENT OF THE IMPERIUM and UNALIGNED units), PSYKER units with this ability gain a bonus (see below) depending on which Tide of the Warp is dominant for your army, as follows.
you don't lose brotherhood, but you do lose your tides (which are your purity bonus)
What are UM going to loose if this army integrates an IK detachment?
Former moderator 40kOnline
Lanchester's square law - please obey in list building!
Illumini: "And thank you for not finishing your post with a "" I'm sorry, but after 7200 's that has to be the most annoying sign-off ever."
wuestenfux wrote: Contrary to the opinion above, you can run two factions (detachments) in a single army if they share the same keyword, here IMPERIUM.
you can, but in matched play you lose your faction purity bonuses
Not clear to me:
Suppose I have a battle-forged army, i.e. the army is organized so that all its units are in Detachments.
In a battle-forged army, all of the units in your army (except UNALIGNED) must have at least one Faction keyword in common (e.g. IMPERIUM) even if they are in different Detachments.
Let's talk about GK as I have the codex at hand.
In a battle-forged army, GK Detachments gain the Brotherhood ability, The Aegis ability, and Troops have objective secured.
So fielding another faction Detachment, say Imperial Knight, seems to be irrelevant here.
If every unit from your army has the GREY KNIGHTS keyword (excluding AGENT OF THE IMPERIUM and UNALIGNED units), PSYKER units with this ability gain a bonus (see below) depending on which Tide of the Warp is dominant for your army, as follows.
you don't lose brotherhood, but you do lose your tides (which are your purity bonus)
What are UM going to loose if this army integrates an IK detachment?
Doctrines.
You know you're really doing something when you can make strangers hate you over the Internet. - Mauleed
Just remember folks. Panic. Panic all the time. It's the only way to survive, other than just being mindful, of course-but geez, that's so friggin' boring. - Aegis Grimm
Hallowed is the All Pie The Before Times: A Place That Celebrates The World That Was
" I'm sorry, but after 7200 's that has to be the most annoying sign-off ever." 
7000 
