PDA

View Full Version : How has the knight been received



IcedCrow
17-03-2014, 12:58
The knight is here. As a super heavy in a non escalation environment our campaign has allowed it provided your opponent gives permission.

Most of us are ok with it. One player rage quit immediately upon hearing it was allowed and another played a game against it and decided he would never again allow it.

All in all the majority are ok with it though.

How has the knight been received where you are?

Poseidal
17-03-2014, 13:09
One ordered 3 and then went on to play Adeptus Titanicus with the original (ie Epic scale) models.

I was the only other player considering getting one, and I would have for about half the price where it competes with similar sized, much more detailed kits of walkers that exist from other companies.

Wayshuba
17-03-2014, 13:40
Local FLGS ordered one. Still there with no interest at $140. Like Poseidal said, everyone seems to know that there are better kits at half the price. IP will only get you so far.

Of course, as I have mentioned before, since Nov/Dec a vast majority of the stores GW players have now moved on from 40k. Honestly, the Knight release is pretty much going unnoticed (but the store can't seem to stock Infinity fast enough!).

IcedCrow
17-03-2014, 14:02
Neat. Our store sold about 26 knights and then another sold 5. But GW games are still going strong there.

Denny
17-03-2014, 14:08
No one in my group has expressed a concern about playing against a knight.
Nobody has bought one either.

I'd be tempted if I didn't recall how long it took be to paint that dang Wraithkinght

Nubl0
17-03-2014, 14:15
Wouldn't say there are "better" kits for half the price floating around. Closest comparison I can make is between the knight and Dreamforce leviathan, of which I own both. The leviathan certainly gives you more bang for your buck being quite a it bigger, however more detailed? No not really I would say the night has better aesthetic and more detail. That said it's still overpriced compared to even a wraithknight, so I won't likely be picking up another one.

Anyway around here some guys have really taken to them but a lot of people despite how much they like the look of it don't really want to drop 85 on one. That seems sensible to me, honestly if I could go back I would pay 50-60 for it, but that would require GW to restructure its pricing on everything, as right now a lizardmen carnosaur will set you back 50 and while it's beautiful it's certainly not worth that for the size.

Poseidal
17-03-2014, 14:21
Look at Japanese kits.

MagicHat
17-03-2014, 14:23
2 (including me) have bought one, and a third player is considering getting a "fatsuit".

There is some skepticism if they are balanced in 40K. One of the Tau playing kids was the most vocal against them. Fate gave him command of one in a game of apocalpyse, where it died turn two, having achieved nothing of worth, to a squad of valkyrie deployed melta-vets.
He have gone from telling me how cheesy the Knight is to how his deepstriking melta suits will annihilate mine.

Anyone showing up with a primary detachment will probably be slapped silly though.

IcedCrow
17-03-2014, 14:30
I'd like to point out:

Imperial Knights are almost functionally equivalent to a wraith knight.

The wraith knight's sun cannon has better AP, 3 blast templates with re-roll scatter (via scatter laser) vs the knights melta OR 2 battle cannon AP3 shots - they can both destroy a unit of marines in one turn.

They both have 6 HP/Wounds.
The wraith knight doesnt roll on the vehicle chart so doesn't take extra damage at all.

The wraith knight is T8 with a 5++ everywhere (via the shield), the imp knight is AV 13 in the front and weaker on sides and rear with a 4++ shield that sits on one facing.

The wraith knight is a monstrous creature. The imp knight has a D weapon for melee so can one shot kill things though most items in the game will be killed by either in one hit due to instant death. The wraith knight still grants you your inv save.

They both have Init 4 and both move 12". They can both pretty much move how they want to.

The imp knight is more expensive.

Put side by side these two models are very very similar in what they do both offensively and defensively.

Horus38
17-03-2014, 14:56
They've been well received in our group, we have 8 at the shop spread across 5 people. They're an interesting addition, but by no means overpowered.

Nubl0
17-03-2014, 14:59
Look at Japanese kits.

Japanese mecha does not interest me in the slightest, so while they could possibly be much better value I would never set out to purchase one.

Mr. Ultra
17-03-2014, 15:06
In my place the vast majority of 40k players are way more excited by the Hellbrutes and incoming Imperial Guard, so the Knights have passed totally unnoticed. I myself forgot that they exist sometimes when talking about recent releases, so great is my interest.

Navar
17-03-2014, 15:07
Around here it has been very well received. I have one, and the local store can't seem to keep them on the shelves (I went in yesterday and they are sold out again.)

I also reject the notion that similar sized, much more detailed kits of walkers exist from other companies.

My nearest comparison is Privateer Press, and they are priced about the same. One might be able to argue that the PP Kits are more detailed, but I think you would also have to argue that the knight is a bit bigger.

The Dreamforge kits are big, but are no where near as detailed (as Nubl0 said.) I am not sure what Japanese kits that Poseidal is talking about, but I assume that they are Gundams, so lack the aesthetic of 40k.

The Emperor
17-03-2014, 15:09
They both have Init 4 and both move 12". They can both pretty much move how they want to.

The Wraithknight's Initiative is 5, actually, and is faster than the Imperial Knight. They may both technically move 12", but the Wraithknight is Jump Infantry, so it can always move 12" and always ignore terrain while moving. The Knight, however, is subject to the Move Through Cover rules. And at present that means that, if it moves through cover, its maximum speed is 6". It also has one more Attack than the Imperial Knight and benefits from a 3+ Armor Save which the Imperial Knight doesn't get.

Wayshuba
17-03-2014, 15:10
I'd like to point out:

Imperial Knights are almost functionally equivalent to a wraith knight.

The wraith knight's sun cannon has better AP, 3 blast templates with re-roll scatter (via scatter laser) vs the knights melta OR 2 battle cannon AP3 shots - they can both destroy a unit of marines in one turn.

They both have 6 HP/Wounds.
The wraith knight doesnt roll on the vehicle chart so doesn't take extra damage at all.

The wraith knight is T8 with a 5++ everywhere (via the shield), the imp knight is AV 13 in the front and weaker on sides and rear with a 4++ shield that sits on one facing.

The wraith knight is a monstrous creature. The imp knight has a D weapon for melee so can one shot kill things though most items in the game will be killed by either in one hit due to instant death. The wraith knight still grants you your inv save.

They both have Init 4 and both move 12". They can both pretty much move how they want to.

The imp knight is more expensive.

Put side by side these two models are very very similar in what they do both offensively and defensively.

I agree. Biggest difference though is that the Knights can be fielded as an entire army whereas the WK is a bit more limited. Also, battlecannon is 5" template vs. 3" template and Ordnance (so 2D6 on vehicle penetration vs 1D6) and perhaps the biggest one - the Battle Cannon is 72" range vs. Suncannon being 36". Meaning you take a pounding from the Knights from the very first turn of the game, whereas the WK needs to get in range. Along a length of the table, it mean the WK may have to withstand two turns of taking a pounding before getting into range. Also, at 36" range you add Heavy Stubber, but this is negated against additional weapons on WK.

In melee, WK versus IK Paladin, that is a stark difference. IK can basically one shot the WK whereas WK is going to contend with armor penetration, hits etc.

Another couple of differences - IKs have damage reduction as a result of Invincible Behemoth. They have Stomp (an additional D3 attacks), Hammer of Wrath (if they get charge off there is a good chance opponent will be destroyed at I10 step), has Smash for more melee options, and strikedown (which doesn't really effect WKs or vehicles) but is a pain in the butt on all things hit that somehow manage to survive.

IMO, these special rules add up to making it very nasty. They can sit across the table and pound you from Turn 1. Add in a void shield (or 3) and some clean up troops for DS meltas, et al. and they make for a very tough force.

The larger base of the IK is also a bit of a weakness. It means 6,242 guys can simultaneously gang up on the thing - if you get many that far.

Poseidal
17-03-2014, 15:12
Japanese mecha does not interest me in the slightest, so while they could possibly be much better value I would never set out to purchase one.

They're still walkers, and achieve the level of detail and price point that's a lot better. It was about the price points of what can be made, compared with what they are offering.

Also, there are more than just the Gundam ranges, which can fit into other sensibilities like the Metal Gear one, though that one's really expensive as well (I think it's bigger though).

OuroborosTriumphant
17-03-2014, 15:16
I'd like to point out:

Imperial Knights are almost functionally equivalent to a wraith knight.

The wraith knight's sun cannon has better AP, 3 blast templates with re-roll scatter (via scatter laser) vs the knights melta OR 2 battle cannon AP3 shots - they can both destroy a unit of marines in one turn.

They both have 6 HP/Wounds.
The wraith knight doesnt roll on the vehicle chart so doesn't take extra damage at all.

The wraith knight is T8 with a 5++ everywhere (via the shield), the imp knight is AV 13 in the front and weaker on sides and rear with a 4++ shield that sits on one facing.

The wraith knight is a monstrous creature. The imp knight has a D weapon for melee so can one shot kill things though most items in the game will be killed by either in one hit due to instant death. The wraith knight still grants you your inv save.

They both have Init 4 and both move 12". They can both pretty much move how they want to.

The imp knight is more expensive.

Put side by side these two models are very very similar in what they do both offensively and defensively.

Well, you're essentially paying 100-odd points to upgrade your close-combat to Str D. This is worth it if you run into TH/SS terminators, enemy superheavies, 2++ rerollable deathstars or riptides. I think I'd also rate the Knight's weapon options slightly higher than the Suncannon because they can crack enemy vehicles if needed, while the Suncannon will struggle.

I think Knights are pretty solidly balanced. They are big and tough and deadly but they cost a whole stack of points.

IcedCrow
17-03-2014, 15:17
The Wraithknight's Initiative is 5, actually, and is faster than the Imperial Knight. They may both technically move 12", but the Wraithknight is Jump Infantry, so it can always move 12" and always ignore terrain while moving. The Knight, however, is subject to the Move Through Cover rules. And at present that means that, if it moves through cover, its maximum speed is 6". It also has one more Attack than the Imperial Knight and benefits from a 3+ Armor Save which the Imperial Knight doesn't get.

I must have a misprinting then. My book clearly says Wraith Knight: Init 4.

IcedCrow
17-03-2014, 15:19
I agree. Biggest difference though is that the Knights can be fielded as an entire army whereas the WK is a bit more limited. Also, battlecannon is 5" template vs. 3" template and Ordnance (so 2D6 on vehicle penetration vs 1D6) and perhaps the biggest one - the Battle Cannon is 72" range vs. Suncannon being 36". Meaning you take a pounding from the Knights from the very first turn of the game, whereas the WK needs to get in range. Along a length of the table, it mean the WK may have to withstand two turns of taking a pounding before getting into range.

Yeah the knights have longer range. But again they are about +100 points more so I think they are costed about right when you compare them to the WK.

wyvirn
17-03-2014, 15:24
Ignore me!

OuroborosTriumphant
17-03-2014, 15:25
I agree. Biggest difference though is that the Knights can be fielded as an entire army whereas the WK is a bit more limited.

I'm not so sure that's true. At 1850, you could field 5 Knights but you'll probably want to field 4 and some air support. An Eldar list with Tau allies (am I correct in recalling that Iyanden, unlike the other supplements, can't ally with it's parent 'dex?) can field 3 Wraithknights and a Riptide, matching the Knights MC-for-Walker quite neatly. They won't score, admittedly, but that's what cheap turbo-boosting Jetbikes are for.

Nubl0
17-03-2014, 15:25
My eldar book also says the wraithknight is init 4 like all the other wraith units.

The Emperor
17-03-2014, 15:35
I must have a misprinting then. My book clearly says Wraith Knight: Init 4.

Are you sure you're not looking at its Attack characteristic? Or the Initiative value of the Wraithlord? Because those are 4's. The Initiative on the Wraithknight, however, is 5.

189386

189387


In melee, WK versus IK Paladin, that is a stark difference. IK can basically one shot the WK whereas WK is going to contend with armor penetration, hits etc.

To be fair, the Imperial Knight can only one-shot the Wraithknight if it rolls a 6 for damage. Otherwise it'll average 3 Wounds per hit, so it'd need two hits on average to kill a Wraithknight. And the Imperial Knight has to contend with needing a 4+ to hit just like the Wraithknight needs a 4+ to hit the Imperial Knight, only the Wraithknight has one more Attack than the Knight and has higher Initiative, so it gets to strike first. And at Str 10, it glances on a 3 and penetrates on a 4+. And if it rolls a 5+ for damage then it'll inflict 2-4 Hull Points of damage. So a Wraithknight can potentially kill off an Imperial Knight with two hits before it even gets a chance to strike back.

Horus38
17-03-2014, 15:43
My eldar book also says the wraithknight is init 4 like all the other wraith units.

Y'all must've got the nerfed book version :p Wraithknight is initiative 5 in every publication book I've seen/own.

The Emperor
17-03-2014, 15:44
Y'all must've got the nerfed book version :p Wraithknight is initiative 5 in every publication book I've seen/own.

Hah, yeah, I opened up ArmyBuilder to check what it says there and it says Initiative 5 there as well. Seems like some poor Eldar players have been inadvertently nerfed. :p

Wayshuba
17-03-2014, 15:50
Are you sure you're not looking at its Attack characteristic? Or the Initiative value of the Wraithlord? Because those are 4's. The Initiative on the Wraithknight, however, is 5.

189386

189387



To be fair, the Imperial Knight can only one-shot the Wraithknight if it rolls a 6 for damage. Otherwise it'll average 3 Wounds per hit, so it'd need two hits on average to kill a Wraithknight. And the Imperial Knight has to contend with needing a 4+ to hit just like the Wraithknight needs a 4+ to hit the Imperial Knight, only the Wraithknight has one more Attack than the Knight and has higher Initiative, so it gets to strike first. And at Str 10, it glances on a 3 and penetrates on a 4+. And if it rolls a 5+ for damage then it'll inflict 2-4 Hull Points of damage. So a Wraithknight can potentially kill off an Imperial Knight with two hits before it even gets a chance to strike back.

First, I have I5 for the WK all over my codex.

Second, I agree on the one shot being rare, but it does have a chance. Also don't forget that if the IK charges, it also gains a S10 attack at I10. Also, experience has shown the IKs are going to pound the potential threats that are on the board (and it is kind of hard to hide the WK) from Turn 1.

Forgive me, however, I think I might be missing something. I see a 6 needed for penetrating hit damage to do additional D3.... I miss where wraithknight has AP2 unless your referring to having the WK equipped for melee with Ghostglaive.

I'm not saying, however, there isn't a chance either way. But just pointing out some of the differences.

IcedCrow
17-03-2014, 15:53
I'll look into that then. My book has Init: 4. I'm looking right at it. Not attacks. I4. I don't use army builder so I'm not sure what is listed in army builder.

The Emperor
17-03-2014, 16:00
Also don't forget that if the IK charges, it also gains a S10 attack at I10.

Well, here're two things to consider. First, while the Imperial Knight will land a Str 10 Hammer of Wrath when it assaults, the Wraithknight will get a 3+ Save against it. Second, the Wraithknight is Jump Infantry, so it can move the full 12" while ignoring terrain all the time, while the Imperial Knight is restricted to the Move Through Cover rule, so if it moves to terrain it's stuck moving no more than 6". A halfway intelligent Eldar player, then, can probably outmaneuver the Knight and have his Wraithknight assault first. In which case it'll deliver the Str 10 Hammer of Wrath hit, and unlike the Wraithknight, the Knight gets no save against it. So that's one automatic Str 10 hit in addition to 5 Attacks at Str 10 the Wraithknight can make against the Knight on the charge. So a Knight getting charged by a Wraithknight would probably end up turning ugly.


Also, experience has shown the IKs are going to pound the potential threats that are on the board (and it is kind of hard to hide the WK) from Turn 1.

True, but the Wraithknight could still potentially be taking advantage of Cover Saves to protect it, negating its need for the Scattershield. I've certainly got plenty of terrain pieces which can provide it with one, or obscure it entirely, not to mention that since it's Jump Infantry, it can easily move around those big pieces of terrain. And if it's got Heavy Wraithcannons then that's two Str 10 hits it can deliver against the Knight, inflicting a Hull Point on a 3+ with a 33% chance of inflicting an extra 1-3 Hull Points while the Knight needs a 4+ to wound with its Battlecannon (Or 3+ to wound with its Thermal Cannon, but in that case it only fires one shot and loses the range advantage). The Knight Paladin may temporarily have the ranged advantage, but in a shootout I'd take a Wraithknight with two Heavy Wraithcannons over either version of the Knight.

Poseidal
17-03-2014, 16:09
My Codex says I5 in all entries for it too.


Forgive me, however, I think I might be missing something. I see a 6 needed for penetrating hit damage to do additional D3.... I miss where wraithknight has AP2 unless your referring to having the WK equipped for melee with Ghostglaive.


Monstrous Creatures get AP2 by default for close combat attacks.

MagicHat
17-03-2014, 16:12
First, I have I5 for the WK all over my codex.

Second, I agree on the one shot being rare, but it does have a chance. Also don't forget that if the IK charges, it also gains a S10 attack at I10. Also, experience has shown the IKs are going to pound the potential threats that are on the board (and it is kind of hard to hide the WK) from Turn 1.

Forgive me, however, I think I might be missing something. I see a 6 needed for penetrating hit damage to do additional D3.... I miss where wraithknight has AP2 unless your referring to having the WK equipped for melee with Ghostglaive.

I'm not saying, however, there isn't a chance either way. But just pointing out some of the differences.

You forgets smash making the WK AP2, and they can HoW if they charge too.


I'll look into that then. My book has Init: 4. I'm looking right at it. Not attacks. I4. I don't use army builder so I'm not sure what is listed in army builder.

My English book shows I5 in every instance.

OuroborosTriumphant
17-03-2014, 16:15
To be fair, the Imperial Knight can only one-shot the Wraithknight if it rolls a 6 for damage. Otherwise it'll average 3 Wounds per hit, so it'd need two hits on average to kill a Wraithknight. And the Imperial Knight has to contend with needing a 4+ to hit just like the Wraithknight needs a 4+ to hit the Imperial Knight, only the Wraithknight has one more Attack than the Knight and has higher Initiative, so it gets to strike first. And at Str 10, it glances on a 3 and penetrates on a 4+. And if it rolls a 5+ for damage then it'll inflict 2-4 Hull Points of damage. So a Wraithknight can potentially kill off an Imperial Knight with two hits before it even gets a chance to strike back.


First off, my Codex:Eldar concurs with the Emperor's. Initiative 5 on the Wraithknight.

Second off, the chances of a Wraithknight killing a Knight before the Knight strikes back are reasonably low. Assuming the Wraithknight charged, it has about a 6% chance of killing the Knight before the Knight's Initiative. If it doesn't get the charge, it has about a 2.5% chance. By contrast, the Knight has a 58% chance of killing the Wraithknight in one round if it gets the charge and lives to strike and a 41% chance to kill it in one round if it is charged and lives to strike.

So yes, the Wraithknight can kill the Knight in round 1, it's not hugely likely. The Knight is more likely to kill the Wraithknight in round 1, though obviously unless the Knight is very lucky, the Wraithknight is likely to do at least some damage first.

The Emperor
17-03-2014, 16:20
True. A Knight on the charge, on average, will inflict two hits which on average will themselves inflict 6 Wounds on a Wraithknight and kill it round one, while the Wraithknight needs to beat the odds to kill a Knight in the first turn of combat. And even if it's charged it's still got pretty good odds of killing off a Wraithknight in the first round of combat, and likely finishing it in the second round. I'm generally accustomed to the dice screwing me over at every turn, though, so I always have to plan against that. :p

OuroborosTriumphant
17-03-2014, 16:28
True. A Knight on the charge, on average, will inflict two hits which on average will themselves inflict 6 Wounds on a Wraithknight and kill it round one, while the Wraithknight needs to beat the odds to kill a Knight in the first turn of combat. And even if it's charged it's still got pretty good odds of killing off a Wraithknight in the first round of combat, and likely finishing it in the second round. I'm generally accustomed to the dice screwing me over at every turn, though, so I always have to plan against that. :p

Always good to have a back-up plan. Those 6% chances do happen. And of course, 6% chance of death in round 1, doesn't mean a 94% chance of everything being fine. The Wraithknight could well do a serious chunk of damage to the Knight, get killed in return and then have a Guardian with an Eldar Missile Launcher knock the Knight's last hull point off.

But yeah, overall, in a mano-e-mano between Wraithknight and a Knight, bet on the Knight. Not least because sometimes when he loses, he'll blow his killer up as well!

itcamefromthedeep
17-03-2014, 16:33
It's unclear in my area. Most of us are still in the "wait and see" camp.

One of the players who brings the hardest lists around is interested in them, used as a primary detachment in conjunction with a Storm Wing. That bodes poorly for our area's estimation of their balance.

On the other hand, a single one is clearly killable by a conventional list.

The devastating nature of the explosions seem to be received poorly for being somewhat comical in its effectiveness.

The Emperor
17-03-2014, 16:37
Well, getting back on topic, my FLGS sold out all the Knights in the initial order through preorders before they'd even arrived. I myself have purchased three (although I sold one on eBay at a $2.50 loss because I felt like an idiot for fully assembling it and leaving myself unable to do a good paint job on it, so the other two are currently still sitting on their sprues), and the latter two I bought after they had to restock, so it seems the locals like the Knights. I think I heard one guy got an army of them, although I haven't seen it in action. At the moment my FLGS only has one Knight in stock.

Exorcist
17-03-2014, 16:45
I think one as an ally, maybe two is fine. 4 - 5 as an own army sound a bit to cheesy for me. I will buy one as an ally for my Exorcists. (Still working on the backround. As long as i dont have that i wont buy one :P Cant have a Unit without a backround.)

So, i love the look, the fluff and the rules. And as other pointed out, apart from the D-weapon, its mostly just a wraithknight.

IcedCrow
17-03-2014, 16:45
Also for clarification - this wasn't a thread on the wraith knight vs the knight - the wraith knight bit was a counter to people saying the imperial knight is OP and broken and should not be used (which is what a few people in my group are claiming).

Scribe of Khorne
17-03-2014, 16:47
I'd like to point out:

Imperial Knights are almost functionally equivalent to a wraith knight.

The wraith knight's sun cannon has better AP, 3 blast templates with re-roll scatter (via scatter laser) vs the knights melta OR 2 battle cannon AP3 shots - they can both destroy a unit of marines in one turn.

They both have 6 HP/Wounds.
The wraith knight doesnt roll on the vehicle chart so doesn't take extra damage at all.

The wraith knight is T8 with a 5++ everywhere (via the shield), the imp knight is AV 13 in the front and weaker on sides and rear with a 4++ shield that sits on one facing.

The wraith knight is a monstrous creature. The imp knight has a D weapon for melee so can one shot kill things though most items in the game will be killed by either in one hit due to instant death. The wraith knight still grants you your inv save.

They both have Init 4 and both move 12". They can both pretty much move how they want to.

The imp knight is more expensive.

Put side by side these two models are very very similar in what they do both offensively and defensively.

And unless you are already riding the tiger, Wraithknights are stupid in 40K anyway. A 'normal' 40K list, even with flyers, has an uphill battle against just one of the things.

Either way, for 'normal' games of 40K, my group doesnt like these things.

EDIT: The model is great, but it should have been escalation only, same with the Wraithknight and possibly even the bloody Riptide.

Camman1984
17-03-2014, 16:54
I played a proxy game the other day, he wanted to field 5 knights and only owns 2 so far, i wanted to try a big mech eldar list myself. It was 2000 points

iirc he had

3 battle cannon knights and 2 melta knights

I had

Autarch on jetbike
Autarch on jetbike

43 wind riders

Crimson hunter

6x stock wraith knights.

A totally tailored list and not representative of normal games but was a very fun game. Those 12 str 10 shots all from different angles quickly took a toll on his knights, while he was able to average 4/5 wounds a turn barring my area terrain cover saves. The autarchs got my hunter on early and my bikes on late. I finally tabled him in turn 6 when my remaining 3, badly wounded knights charged his warlord and blew him up (taking one of the knights with him in the blast)

Just goes to show that nothing that big and powerful should be regularly spammed, and that the knight army is a mistake for regular games.

Wolf Lord Balrog
17-03-2014, 17:20
Owner of my local FLGS reports he has sold 8 Imperial Knights so far, but I haven't seen one in a game yet. The consensus from the couple owners I've been able to talk to is that bringing one in your list without getting the opponent's permission first would be bad form.

Navar
17-03-2014, 17:21
The model is great, but it should have been escalation only, same with the Wraithknight and possibly even the bloody Riptide.

Just to point out a couple of things.

Escalation is a supplement, just like codices. So it is "core." If you mean that they should have been limited to only being able to field 1 then you may be right though. If you mean "an optional part of the game" then they are just as optional as they would have been if they were included in Escalation.

And I would have loved for the knight to have been a Lord of War option. My Iron Hands are still waiting for an excuse to take it as a Lord of War.

Scribe of Khorne
17-03-2014, 17:40
Just to point out a couple of things.

Escalation is a supplement, just like codices. So it is "core." If you mean that they should have been limited to only being able to field 1 then you may be right though. If you mean "an optional part of the game" then they are just as optional as they would have been if they were included in Escalation.

And I would have loved for the knight to have been a Lord of War option. My Iron Hands are still waiting for an excuse to take it as a Lord of War.

Yes, I know the various distinctions, but there is something (till 7th...) 'other' about Escalation that despite possible intent puts it outside the normal game to myself and those around here.

Navar
17-03-2014, 17:47
Yes, I know the various distinctions, but there is something (till 7th...) 'other' about Escalation that despite possible intent puts it outside the normal game to myself and those around here.

Well that is an issue with you and your group then though, not with the rules of the game. In fact if you have no problem disallowing Escalation then disallowing Codex: Imperial Knights shouldn't be an issue either. They are both supplements.

Scribe of Khorne
17-03-2014, 17:50
True indeed, but what I'm getting at, is that it should have just been included in Escalation. :]

Navar
17-03-2014, 17:54
True indeed, but what I'm getting at, is that it should have just been included in Escalation. :]

My Iron Hands would have loved this. Maybe I can hope for a way to take one as a Lord of War in 7th.

Reinholt
17-03-2014, 17:58
So far:

1 - High praise as a model.
2 - Complaints it is too pricey.
3 - People taking one in games with warning for their opponents have been well received.
4 - People taking them without warning, expecting to use them in random pickup games, or taking them as the primary detachment have not been well received at all.

DoctorTom
17-03-2014, 18:12
True indeed, but what I'm getting at, is that it should have just been included in Escalation. :]

Escalation dealt with Lords of War. Imperial Knights aren't Lords of War. GW made a codex so that multiple numbers of them can be taken either as a primary detachment or as allies, unlike the limit of 1 Lord of War. Knights don't fit in the Escalation book; it makes more sense for them to have been released separately.

You'll just have to accept that a Guard army can include both Knights and a Baneblade. ;)

Camman1984
17-03-2014, 18:38
I think the lord of war thing is just a weird inconsistency. If i take a single super heavy as a lord of war, GW thought they were powerful enough to warrant balancing rules, like improved seize rolls, specific warlord traits, extra VP for killing it. Now we have a super heavy that has none of that, and even worse can be fielded in groups.

Scribe of Khorne
17-03-2014, 19:16
Escalation dealt with Lords of War. Imperial Knights aren't Lords of War. GW made a codex so that multiple numbers of them can be taken either as a primary detachment or as allies, unlike the limit of 1 Lord of War. Knights don't fit in the Escalation book; it makes more sense for them to have been released separately.

You'll just have to accept that a Guard army can include both Knights and a Baneblade. ;)

Again, I'm well aware of the current status, but I'm saying what it should have been, to increase acceptance.

I dont accept an IG army with Knights and a Baneblade, I simply wouldnt play it. :p


I think the lord of war thing is just a weird inconsistency. If i take a single super heavy as a lord of war, GW thought they were powerful enough to warrant balancing rules, like improved seize rolls, specific warlord traits, extra VP for killing it. Now we have a super heavy that has none of that, and even worse can be fielded in groups.


This, completely.

itcamefromthedeep
17-03-2014, 19:28
Playing against an army that consisted of nothing but scoring Wraithknights would be lame. Not unbeatable by any stretch, but almost always lame.

It's the same problem with Knights as a primary detachment, and for much the same reasons. It's perhaps worse, because Knights are outright immune to the attacks of more kinds of units. The poorly-written mechanics for super-heavies (movement, damage table, explosions, stomps) and Destroyer weapons only magnify the lameness.

AngryAngel
17-03-2014, 19:48
I would say that just about any release is accepted the same with the same reasons. Model nice, price too high, rules ok in moderation, placement poor. The standard GW flip flop of great idea and poor design in how to place it in the game. Around here, we had some panic and fear flow through people. However their actual acceptance ? I've not seen any yet, they seem good but not too fantastic. The only issue being if you don't know you'll run into a whole army of them you'll have a lot of wasted weapons.

I think for those who don't enjoy them, it will be a shame as I would wager it is a sign of things to come. Super heavies being just pressed into the deeper level of the core game, like flyers. Escalation being the toe in the water, allied and primary army Imp Knights being the whole leg in, coming edition just diving on in. I can see the issues, and if it is right or wrong just falls into what GW demands the game to mutate into.

Scribe of Khorne
17-03-2014, 19:51
Its essentially the mismatch between GW desire, and many peoples expectations. We want to build an army, singular, and then play with it. GW wants to keep throwing things at us that make us have to redo that army, leading to poor meta conditions like wolves doing nothing but spamming ML's in 5th, ruining Nids faces.

I would love to be able to bring an all comers list, and just play games. Going up against an army on Knights would be a waste of time.

leopard
17-03-2014, 20:03
Love the model, not built it yet though as busy with other projects, just looking at the thing in the box. I can hear it whispering to me.

In game terms I have less of an idea (have yet to actually play 6th, though a game next week will change that), but can imagine such units being reasonably easy to limit simply by having areas of a board with dense LoS blocking terrain where infantry can rule and where units of mongo bases simply don't fit - let the big stuff provide fire support but require some smaller stuff to go house to house so the big stuff supports in a balanced force but turn up with all big stuff and you will struggle.

I know 5th changed totally when I upped the terrain on the board somewhat and become much more of a knife fight in a dark alley even with the tanks.

Apoc and larger games are even better, a table big enough for a couple of dense areas and some open space for the bigger stuff to do its thing.

Seems the problem is not so much the model as the way the game gets played - random pick up games making it harder to agree before hand what sort of game to play - do wonder on having a couple of lists so can play 'hard' or 'soft' depending on who and what I'm facing.

Knight will be built, will probably be used as often as my Stormlord (which has been used once, it died) as not planning on forking out for the rules

Theocracity
17-03-2014, 20:07
I think the lord of war thing is just a weird inconsistency. If i take a single super heavy as a lord of war, GW thought they were powerful enough to warrant balancing rules, like improved seize rolls, specific warlord traits, extra VP for killing it. Now we have a super heavy that has none of that, and even worse can be fielded in groups.

Well, to be fair, Knights are cheaper and less resilient than most Lords of War. They also don't make as much use of the multi-target shooting that a lot of LoW benefit from. So I can see how fielding just one as a LoW slot wouldn't be seen as very useful.

That being said, I think it might have made sense to have them be a 1-3 pick for a LoW slot rather than the weird ally situation. But maybe they wanted the codex to be self contained.

I like the conceptual idea of an all-Knight army, but in practice I would only want to play against one in an appropriate themed game or campaign. It's neat as an option but shouldn't be abused.

druchii
17-03-2014, 20:34
Knights have sold incredibly well here in Ohio. Our local store (the largest in Columbus) has sold TONS of them, I've personally seen six being built/painted. I haven't witnessed any games with them yet (but that will change, since people tend to build and paint their stuff around here) and tonight is 40k night...

I bought one day 1 and can say it was a treat to build and paint. There are tons of small details on the model that allow it to be painted really easily (like larger raised areas so you can black line it easier, and pre-segmented armor plates for easier halving/quartering, a basic pose to make it easy to paint (although I ruined that by making mine running), and large flat surfaces that make it really easy to shade/highlight with a base, layer and wash.

Rules, I'm always of the opinion that more variety is better, but we'll see how I feel the first time I get blindsided by a Knight army ;)

d

Marshal
17-03-2014, 20:50
For those with the I4 wraithknights...are you sure you're not looking at the Wraithlord entry which is I4?


On the subject at hand. I'm not too sure about our local group as I haven't been out and about talking with people lately since the knight's announcement, but I personally plan on picking one up for use though I have to wait till I have a bunch of stuff assembled and painted before I do that. Too many things on my plate at this moment before that happens (1850 of Dark Eldar to paint and a 1k Iron Warriors lists for a doubles tournament) before I can get into other things.

lethlis
17-03-2014, 21:11
I bought mine but have not even taken it out of the box yet.

That is mainly because it is my reward for getting my Adepticon Army painted in time(Two weeks to get er done). However if they let us take them and I get stuff painted in time, I might give my new airbrush a run for its money getting it ready to go.

They are not busted in any way IMO. If you are bringing stuff to deal with wave serpents, land raiders or other tanks you should have no problems with knights.

Navar
17-03-2014, 21:47
Again, I'm well aware of the current status, but I'm saying what it should have been, to increase acceptance.

It is odd that you say that making them a lord of war would increase acceptance.

It seems (if I read between the lines from your posts just a bit) that in your local meta Escalation is not accepted, but Knights are.

I hear this is true in lots of areas. I think I would argue that having knights be a part of Escalation would have actually decreased the acceptance of Knights.

Scribe of Khorne
17-03-2014, 23:24
It is odd that you say that making them a lord of war would increase acceptance.

It seems (if I read between the lines from your posts just a bit) that in your local meta Escalation is not accepted, but Knights are.

I hear this is true in lots of areas. I think I would argue that having knights be a part of Escalation would have actually decreased the acceptance of Knights.

Somewhat the opposite actually. Escalation is seen as an entirely different game type vs 'pickup' lets call it instead of Core since as you state escalation is 'core'. "Do you want to play escalation this weekend" "Sure" vs "Do you want to play a game this weekend" "Sure" "Errr, whats that Super Heavy doing".

Knights turning up in 'pickup' is being thought of as just another example of GW not caring about balance, to hell with quality of game experience.

Mandragola
18-03-2014, 00:20
My own thoughts are that knights are totally fine as allies, and actually good for the game by providing a counter to death stars, but insane as primary detachments.

They are not as powerful as lord or war superheavies and make less of an impact on the game. Their guns are a substantial step down to the kinds of things you see on something like a Hellhammer or stompa, which rightly cost a lot more points. A single knight has to trek across the board before it gets to play with its chainsaw, and is vulnerable to things like melta before and after getting into combat. With an army of the things the other guy just can't be expected to have nearly enough counters in a non-tailored list, and the game becomes (very literally) a walkover.

Azazel
18-03-2014, 01:19
I'm the only one in my group who bought any Knights, and I bought four.

My friends and I have had a laugh about four Knights in 1500 points. And they're adjusting their lists accordingly. All the DE Wyches, Chainfists and Meltas weapons we haven't seen in years are getting dusted off.

Personally I think its no worse than some lists you can make with Tau, Daemons or Eldar. But that said no one will enjoy a game where 100 of their models can't kill anything. I think as long as you give your opponents a fair heads up to change a few things in their list, that should be fine.


But with game balance so far down the toilet anyway you might as well just pick the models you like and stick with them.

Ozendorph
18-03-2014, 02:18
I've only been by a couple shops since their release, but honestly I thought the Knights would have had more of an impact. If we still had the Bunker it would have been KNIGHT MADNESS over there, I'm sure.

JPThunda
18-03-2014, 03:40
My personal experiences with my Knight, they're not that bad. I've run one of them as allies to my Black Templars and they're not game breaking, not even close, and a well balanced army can bring them down in 1-2 turns of fire.

Scribe of Khorne
18-03-2014, 03:47
My personal experiences with my Knight, they're not that bad. I've run one of them as allies to my Black Templars and they're not game breaking, not even close, and a well balanced army can bring them down in 1-2 turns of fire.

A well balanced army you say, spending 2 turns shooting at it you say. Sounds fine and balanced...

Voss
18-03-2014, 04:25
Somewhat the opposite actually. Escalation is seen as an entirely different game type vs 'pickup' lets call it instead of Core since as you state escalation is 'core'. "Do you want to play escalation this weekend" "Sure" vs "Do you want to play a game this weekend" "Sure" "Errr, whats that Super Heavy doing".


Interesting. I was reading your back and forth here, and it occurred to me that the Esclation/Lords of War/Knights stuff (coupled with 7th edition rumours) reminds me a lot of the SM and Ork flyers getting random rules pre-6th edition and then completely different flyer rules (via FAQs) once 6th edition hit just a few months later. I wonder if some sort of equally-bizarre revision is going to be the order of the day at some point this summer.

The downside of this possibility is that flyers weren't even vaguely spiking the rules of the game pre-sixth edition, and have been troublesome since. So a 7th edition incorporating Lords of War, Escalation and etc could be even worse...

Scribe of Khorne
18-03-2014, 04:46
Had that exact conversation this last weekend Voss.

I think its nearly a forgone conclusion that 7th will incorporate Lords of War/Escalation/Stronghold and the language around Supplements and Forge World (maybe, hopefully) into the main 'core' book.

GW wants, despite its best efforts to the contrary, to sell us models. All of them, even the ones we dont want. What better way to test the waters than with content to be replaced in the next reboot. :p

Voss
18-03-2014, 04:58
Had that exact conversation this last weekend Voss.

I think its nearly a forgone conclusion that 7th will incorporate Lords of War/Escalation/Stronghold and the language around Supplements and Forge World (maybe, hopefully) into the main 'core' book.

GW wants, despite its best efforts to the contrary, to sell us models. All of them, even the ones we dont want. What better way to test the waters than with content to be replaced in the next reboot. :p
Funny thing is, its made me buy neither models nor rules until things shake out. Not knowing what is going on or what the shape of the game is really like...or what it will be like 6 months from now. My worst memories of 40K are from the 'trial rules' period back in the day, when things (assault, vehicles, especially the VDR) were shifting around every month. I stopped actually playing for years because of that nonsense and have no desire to deal with it again.

There are 40k armies I'd like to build up or expand (once I have some free time again next month), but... yeah. With the future intentionally obfuscated, my motivation to do any work (or make any purchases) is leaning towards... 'Hey, what are those other companies doing?' I can't even pick up a less popular 40K army and expect it to stay static for 6-8 years any more, and that is really irritating.

Scribe of Khorne
18-03-2014, 05:44
I completely get what your saying. Its something that for me has been especially frustrating because I like to solve for things, whatever that 'thing' is, in the past it would stay still, now though, its just down to the week practically.

What I have done instead, is go back to my roots. I am essentially rebuilding the army I started 5th with, and regardless of where 6th goes, or what 7th turns out to be, its what I'll run till my days rolling dice come to an end, I may not win all my games, and the meta may go wildly in one direction or the other, but the Chaos Daemons book seems pretty well placed to ride it out, with some flavour of allies or another.

Losing Command
18-03-2014, 06:07
If your local area isn't composed entirely of WAAC tournament go'ers you can actually have great fun with this edition, even with sub-par fluffy or silly themed armies. I rarely use the same armylist twice (to many models) play once every week and more often than not battles are hardly onesided. It shouldn't be that hard to find likeminded people who still want to play a game of 40k but have no intention of adjusting their armies or collection to match the latest Cheeze. You could even agree to limit some of the random gimmicks (like not using mysterious terrain, random objectives and/or just choosing psychic powers) or even adjust points for units that are really that bad yourselves.

On topic : Generally people either love the model or go 'meh' and consider it to expensive, both in cash and points. There hasn't been a rush to get Knights, but people who considered getting one often decide to do so after seeing one in teh realz that is decently painted.

Being the only one having used a Knight in games so far (allied with GK, so I don't have to use Dreadknights) at the LGS, I'm not very impressed by its performance so far. In the first battle it saw use (against Wraith-spam Eldar) it caused some wounds here, took of a hullpoint there but didn't have much impact. Maybe it scared the Eldar from going in for CC with the 3 Wraithknights, but the turn 1 waveserpent kill due to Searchlights from the Psyfleman dreads contributed more to the win (best 2 points spend ever :cool:)
2nd game was against marines who ... came very much prepared (3 vanilla Landraiders, predator annihilator, lascannon deveastators, TH/SS terminators, tactical terminators, a unit tacticals and a unit scouts) and 'to everybody's great suprise' :rolleyes: the Knight exploded turn 1. What the Knight achieved that helped with the win was having the decency to scatter away from all my units before going nuclear :D

Probably never going to face a whole army of Knights, and not really shure how broken that would actually be. Seeing how Tremor rounds from thunderfire cannons mess up their movement and how little damage Knights cause from range against Centurions, my marines might not be very impressed. My GK would struggle with it for shure, but they do that with any high AV long range weapons vehicle spam. Facing 10 Leman Russ's sounds more scary to me than facing 5 Knights.

WLBjork
18-03-2014, 08:18
One knight on it's own isn't a threat* to any balanced army.

Multiples and yes, tailored lists will be necessary. I've got a scenario in mind whereby the Knights have been assigned to clear a rebellious city of guerrillas.

*provided you can roll dice better than I can. 4 turns of shooting a Valdor at AV 13 and I take 1 lousy hull point with the lascannon...

ismeno
18-03-2014, 08:30
The Knight is no different than many other powerful builds. My DG would be thrashed facing an all Kn-army, but then they would be against Necron flying circus or Taudar too.....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Camman1984
18-03-2014, 08:38
I saw two men argueing like children over this the other day and it wasnt pretty. This guy 'A'(who jumps from power list to power list) asked in store for an oppenent to face his imperial army list. Someone 'B' quite happily said they would play him.

Player A then proceeded to start pulling out his 5 knights, for which B was completely unprepared. How ever B happened to have an escalation super heavy of his own (a scorpion) and with a quick flurry, wrote it into his list. Player A went off on one about how it wasnt an escalation game and that B was tailoring and needed his permission to use the scorpion. B argued back about the 'knight suprise' it was very ugly.

The bearded one
18-03-2014, 09:48
I'm with player B on that one though. Technically it's tailoring, but knights require a pretty specific set of tools in high volume, and you want the game to at least be fun for both, rather than a steamroll.

Alternatively player B could've let his army quickly get blasted off the field in 10 minutes to prove a point ;)

T10
18-03-2014, 10:12
They're still walkers, and achieve the level of detail and price point that's a lot better.

But do they look like Knights?

-T10

The Emperor
18-03-2014, 10:22
I saw two men argueing like children over this the other day and it wasnt pretty. This guy 'A'(who jumps from power list to power list) asked in store for an oppenent to face his imperial army list. Someone 'B' quite happily said they would play him.

Player A then proceeded to start pulling out his 5 knights, for which B was completely unprepared. How ever B happened to have an escalation super heavy of his own (a scorpion) and with a quick flurry, wrote it into his list. Player A went off on one about how it wasnt an escalation game and that B was tailoring and needed his permission to use the scorpion. B argued back about the 'knight suprise' it was very ugly.

Yeah, A's a jerk. He purposefully tried to hide what army he was playing and tried springing it on the other guy at the last minute. Nevermind the silliness of accusing the guy of "list tailoring", when he went out of the way to look for a player with an army list totally unprepared to face what he was bringing to the table. Sounds like he wanted to play a God Mode game and pat himself on the back at the end after he slaughtered an army loaded up with heavy bolters and flamers. I would've taken about 30 seconds of that before telling the guy to get lost.

meanmachine
18-03-2014, 10:39
I'm the only one in my group who bought any Knights, and I bought four.

My friends and I have had a laugh about four Knights in 1500 points. And they're adjusting their lists accordingly. All the DE Wyches, Chainfists and Meltas weapons we haven't seen in years are getting dusted off.



I was planning to start a knight army and ordered 4 of them with the codex but I cancelled the order.

Im afraid to spend over 600 USD on a army the I might never actually be able to use because people refuse to play and tournaments will ban it.

Poseidal
18-03-2014, 11:34
But do they look like Knights?

-T10
Nothing looks like Knights. (however, I would say some Japanese kits are closer than the Leviathan from leg joint placement alone, the Leviathan design I am NOT impressed by)

It's the comparison of what another company makes in terms of size, detailing and price point.

If you want the Knight design itself, there's no where else to go, but what price point justifies it compared with what you KNOW another company is capable of? Is the cut off at 2 times the cost? 3 times? 10 times?

This isn't really a Knight analogue, but not all Japanese kits are the humanoid bipedal Gundam style ones: http://www.hlj.com/product/kbykp-305 http://www.hlj.com/product/KBYFA-011/Sci

Hengist
18-03-2014, 13:18
It's a nice enough model, but I've no interest in buying one; to my knowledge he same goes for my gaming chums. I haven't really pondered investing in a superheavy for Escalation games, but were I to do so, I imagine I'd buy a Glaive or a Fellblade instead.

IcedCrow
18-03-2014, 13:27
If you want the Knight design itself, there's no where else to go, but what price point justifies it compared with what you KNOW another company is capable of? Is the cut off at 2 times the cost? 3 times? 10 times?

Aesthetics are a big thing to me. I've seen people use gundams to represent titans, transformers to represent titans and baneblades, and a Megatron to represent a wraith knight, and while they all work, they also break the aesthetics of the game to me. As such, I don't mind paying the price for a knight because its a knight, and a gundam is a gundam and doesn't really look 40k to me IMO.

As Aesthetics are the #1 thing for me in this hobby / game I will spend the extra money on that. The game is second to me.

Horus38
18-03-2014, 13:47
Aesthetics are a big thing to me. I've seen people use gundams to represent titans, transformers to represent titans and baneblades, and a Megatron to represent a wraith knight, and while they all work, they also break the aesthetics of the game to me. As such, I don't mind paying the price for a knight because its a knight, and a gundam is a gundam and doesn't really look 40k to me IMO.

As Aesthetics are the #1 thing for me in this hobby / game I will spend the extra money on that. The game is second to me.

Hellz yea :yes: We had a big 7 on 7 friendly apocalypse game this past weekend and one guy brought a giant AT-AT Walker to represent a Bio-titan. The game was a lot of fun for everyone, but every time I looked down the table and saw that thing fighting an Ork Stompa I could only think how much more awesome this would look if it was an actual bio-titan.

Navar
18-03-2014, 14:15
I have to agree with Horus and the Crow here.

But I am going to go out on a limb and say that just looking at those two models that Poseidal put up I am actually happier about having my Knights.

I disagree that the detailing is comparable. The Knight has all of those great pistons, and struts, and connection points, etc. Those Gundams on the other hand have lots of large flat surfaces.

To me it would be MUCH harder to paint one of those and have it look good, and I think that the knight is MUCH more detailed.

I think that Privateer Press IS releasing models that are about the same size (bulk at least) for slightly better value, but at least those are within 10-15% of the cost of the knight.

IcedCrow
18-03-2014, 14:19
PP has some decent models but I find them to be very similar in cost to GW models.

The reason that PP gets away with it is because in PP games you only need a handful of models, which is not my kind of game.

Poseidal
18-03-2014, 14:20
That was my point, as people asked 'how much do those kits resemble the Knight?'

It wasn't as a substitute in game, but an example of how much you can get a model with similar (or actually superior) level of detail, size and other features.

What's the price point where you can't justify getting the knight? Is it at double the cost of an equivalent model? Three times?


I disagree that the detailing is comparable. The Knight has all of those great pistons, and struts, and connection points, etc. Those Gundams on the other hand have lots of large flat surfaces.

That's because the designs are based more on aircraft and don't leave many internals exposed. Adding greebles does not necessarily make it better. Their connection points are finer than what you would get on the Knight.

These are more humanoid, but have details equal or beyond any GW kit:
http://www.hlj.com/product/WAVFS-100/Sci (I actually have this one, and it's a 14 year old kit), http://www.hlj.com/product/KBYVI-073/Sci
http://www.hlj.com/product/KBYVI-043/Sci
http://www.hlj.com/product/KBYVI-064/Sci (check out the missile launcher on the shoulder/back of that one)
http://www.hlj.com/product/KBYVI-50/Sci (details on the heatsinks in areas, and is more 'skeletal' than most)
http://www.hlj.com/product/KBYVI-063/Sci (something more blocky and brick like, weapon arms)

Navar
18-03-2014, 14:26
I was just thinking about their Gargantuan line.

The Circle Orboros Woldwrath (http://files.privateerpress.com/products/models/WoldwrathComparison.jpg) for example is $10.00 less expensive for what is argueabley a slightly "bigger" model.

But the cost (IMHO) is equivalent.

Edit:
[It was] an example of how much you can get a model with similar (or actually superior) level of detail, size and other features.

And here is where I disagree. Looking at the examples you posted I would argue that the Knight is superior is just about every way, ESP detail.

What do you mean by "other features?"

Reinholt
18-03-2014, 14:30
On the topic of size/scale/detail, I find the Knight relatively comparable with the Warmachine Colossals.

http://www.beastsofwar.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Warmachine-Colossals-Image-3.jpg

http://www.beastsofwar.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Front-Templar-with-Scale.jpg

Both are significantly larger than man-sized models, both are in the ballpark of 6" tall (though, obviously, depends on the exact model and posing and all that jazz). So I think the comparison there is apt, and by that measure, the Knight isn't overpriced (it's pricey, but not outrageous).

For me, the issue with the Knight is specifically what happens when you can take a whole army of them (it really has a rock-paper-scissors amplification effect, as many armies will field a majority of models that literally can do nothing to the Knight). I'm disappointed GW didn't take the time to make a Knight list that had actual basic troops (men-at-arms to hold ground?), and instead went the all-vehicle route that has caused so much trouble before.

I feel like it will act as a long-term dampener on what could have been a very good concept, relegating Knights to allies-only in most games.

IcedCrow
18-03-2014, 14:39
That was my point, as people asked 'how much do those kits resemble the Knight?'

It wasn't as a substitute in game, but an example of how much you can get a model with similar (or actually superior) level of detail, size and other features.

What's the price point where you can't justify getting the knight? Is it at double the cost of an equivalent model? Three times?

For me I don't evaluate the models based on the fact that I can buy another unrelated line's models which look nothing like what I want out of the models I want and compare the price per ounce of plastic.

I don't have a "price point" per say. Its fairly abstract with me, I can't pin a mathematical formula on it.

Poseidal
18-03-2014, 15:03
And here is where I disagree. Looking at the examples you posted I would argue that the Knight is superior is just about every way, ESP detail.

What do you mean by "other features?"

I added more examples. The ones before are from Metal Gear and some line I don't know about. Those were just examples of less humanoid walkers (but the second one transforms, which I missed!), rather than the detail ones I had in mind.

The later examples have detail shots

http://www.hlj.com/product/WAVFS-100/Sci (I actually have this one, and it's a 14 year old kit), http://www.hlj.com/product/KBYVI-073/Sci
http://www.hlj.com/product/KBYVI-043/Sci
http://www.hlj.com/product/KBYVI-064/Sci (check out the missile launcher on the shoulder/back of that one)
http://www.hlj.com/product/KBYVI-50/Sci (details on the heatsinks in areas, and is more 'skeletal' than most)
http://www.hlj.com/product/KBYVI-063/Sci (something more blocky and brick like, weapon arms)

What I didn't mention is they are much, much more poseable.

I like the Knight, and it and the Wraithknight are the best 'big kits' that GW (including FW) have done. But even if you don't like the design, you cannot say that any of the second lot are any less detailed than the GW kits (or smaller, for the 1:72 ones that stand taller; the 1:144 one is smaller but costs less again).

Note I'm not knocking the Knight model. The design is top notch, and the details are superb. My only complaint is the markup it has compared to it's peers.*


For me I don't evaluate the models based on the fact that I can buy another unrelated line's models which look nothing like what I want out of the models I want and compare the price per ounce of plastic.

I don't have a "price point" per say. Its fairly abstract with me, I can't pin a mathematical formula on it.
There is that, but there are always break points for everyone; for you, it's a lot more than for me. I was seriously considering it, but it was too much, and unlike the Wraithknight, I won't be using it much (or at all) so it would become a glorified shelf ornament. And I only got the WK because I had 20% off RRP, which puts it into comparable price points with the Japanese kits. I will probably pick up a Knight in the end, but it's the asking price compared with the Kotobukiya and Wave kits which are also 'luxury products' (high end compared with the beginner Bandai kits for example).

On Bandai, Gundam MG kits have full details, including under the armour so you can convert or make 'battle damage' or hanger dioramas with them even, though most of them aren't too my taste (a bit too humanoid I guess). But they're a much bigger company than GW, and have 30 min toy commercials for their kits, so Kotobukiya is probably a better comparison as a smaller company.

*I consider the Knight and Wraithknight actually superior in design (and probably details, looking at them) to even the Forge World walkers.

Spiney Norman
18-03-2014, 16:40
I'd like to point out:

Imperial Knights are almost functionally equivalent to a wraith knight.

Somewhat true, however 2 words, the first one is 'poison', the easy way to bring down a wraithknight is to either splinter-cannon or venomgaunt it to death, neither has any effect on the iknight.

The second word is 'stomps', you can tie a wraithknight up for the entire game with a guard blob squad or tyranid swarm, try that against an imperial knight and you'll have a bad time of it.

I'd say the iKnight does most of the stuff you bring a wraithknight to do, and at the same time plugs its bigger weaknesses whilst having some unique weaknesses of its own (melta). All in all, I'd say the price of the iKnight is about right, while the wraithknight is possibly a little on the cheap side.

Ozendorph
18-03-2014, 16:51
I don't know how good of a value the Knight kit is, but comparison shopping is something I do when buying a new car or blender, not a giant robot. I'm sure some people are buying Knights primarily for their in-game effectiveness - and in that case any model of roughly similar size will do. For me, I want an Imperial Knight because I want an Imperial Knight...as has been the case since the original 6mm versions came out. I've never seen another kit that approximated the aesthetics of the Paladin/Warden/Lancer etc. If I had, I would have bought it ;)

LegionX
18-03-2014, 20:48
For me, I want an Imperial Knight because I want an Imperial Knight...

This. Even if I did decide not to buy a Knight because if its price, I'm not going to buy some other non-40K big robot toy/model instead.

Game effectiveness vs. price vs. volume of plastic was not at the forefront of my mind when I decided to buy one...

DoctorTom
18-03-2014, 21:05
Poseidal, thanks for putting up the links. I've been toying with the idea of a knight (or several, if I go knight army). Some of those types of models are far, far less expensive than the Imperial Knight model and might be worth it for at least initial proxying.

Slayer-Fan123
18-03-2014, 21:25
I added more examples. The ones before are from Metal Gear and some line I don't know about. Those were just examples of less humanoid walkers (but the second one transforms, which I missed!), rather than the detail ones I had in mind.

The later examples have detail shots

http://www.hlj.com/product/WAVFS-100/Sci (I actually have this one, and it's a 14 year old kit), http://www.hlj.com/product/KBYVI-073/Sci
http://www.hlj.com/product/KBYVI-043/Sci
http://www.hlj.com/product/KBYVI-064/Sci (check out the missile launcher on the shoulder/back of that one)
http://www.hlj.com/product/KBYVI-50/Sci (details on the heatsinks in areas, and is more 'skeletal' than most)
http://www.hlj.com/product/KBYVI-063/Sci (something more blocky and brick like, weapon arms)

What I didn't mention is they are much, much more poseable.

To be honest all those look lame. They don't look PRACTICAL, whereas the Knight is built for practicality and killing, and I think that's reflected overall on the model. Somebody showed a Warmachine model and, while I like it less than the regular Knight, it's definitely a solid choice.

Surgency
18-03-2014, 21:30
A well balanced army you say, spending 2 turns shooting at it you say. Sounds fine and balanced...

Kinda like if you field a Land Raider. Or a unit of TH/SS Termies

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

Poseidal
18-03-2014, 21:43
To be honest all those look lame. They don't look PRACTICAL, whereas the Knight is built for practicality and killing, and I think that's reflected overall on the model. Somebody showed a Warmachine model and, while I like it less than the regular Knight, it's definitely a solid choice.

The Knight looks no more practical than those.

Actually, if you look past the inherent silliness of bipedal mechas (which are a silly idea, whether it's Knights or ACs, Gundams or Battletechs), all of those have design features that are very practical in terms of what they're focusses to do.

Also, the Knight and the first one on the list also are NOT designed the be practical. They are made as a prestige vehicle for the fighting men of the setting.

Slayer-Fan123
18-03-2014, 21:48
Please. The Knight looks no more practical than those. And Warmachine?
Somebody above you gave a link to a Warmachine model, and I gave my thoughts on it.

Simply put, the models you showed don't look like they would last in the WH40k universe, and were build to be pretty.
189481
THAT was build for practicality. Nothing fancy, not trying to be pretty. They threw on a giant gun and a giant melee weapon, and made sure to give those a durable platform. It also looks cooler while doing it.

Scribe of Khorne
18-03-2014, 22:04
Kinda like if you field a Land Raider. Or a unit of TH/SS Termies

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

One MC smashing = dead LR, and a unit of TH/SS Termies can fall to Splinter fire. A Knight on the other hand is so far from comparable I question why you even brought these up. :D

InstantKarma
18-03-2014, 22:07
Don't care. Moving away from 40k for now and frankly, whether OP or not, I'm sure my Tau can find a way to deal with them. My IG buddy would be more interested in a Super Heavy than these 'knights'.

Poseidal
18-03-2014, 22:21
Sorry, the Please may have come off as a bit rude. I saw the Warmachine one now, and I really don't like the look of PP models in general.

Only LED Mirage (the first one) has looks mainly in it's design, as it's meant for a knight to fight other knights over territory in a feudal society as traditional warfare and weaponry, along with WMDs will damage the lands too much so aren't used by treaty. The exterior is armour plating like a real suit of armour over the internals.

Actually the Knight is full of features just made for looks; what's more, the exposed cabling is actually less practical than keeping it in the armour. In terms of the origin, they ARE meant to be pretty, otherwise they wouldn't show the loincloth heraldry or the emblem on the shield.

If you take a look at Feedback: http://d2ev13g7cze5ka.cloudfront.net/kby/kbyvi-063_7.jpg?v=1337039487 you can see the armour plating mostly covering the front side, no exposed cabling or piping, and the only things looking 'exposed' would be the joints and boosters (which is true for all of these walkers).

The Lahire: http://www.hlj.com/product/KBYVI-50/Sci is the opposite end of the spectrum, designed for speed. The arm joints show the obvious pistons with a front shield over them as it only is going to be attacking facing the target, so doesn't have the excess armour to make it lighter. The sloped design deflects shells to make up for the lack of bulk and heavy armour something like Sunshine has. The concept would be something that goes fast and jumps and boosts in and out like a Tau battlesuit.

http://www.hlj.com/product/KBYVI-073/Sci Vengeance is made from Junkyard parts, and is somewhat impractical with it's main weapon choice of six giant chainsaws, but what means business more than six of these?

Slayer-Fan123
18-03-2014, 22:31
Sorry, the Please may have come off as a bit rude. I saw the Warmachine one now, and I really don't like the look of PP models in general.

Only LED Mirage (the first one) has looks mainly in it's design, as it's meant for a knight to fight other knights over territory in a feudal society as traditional warfare and weaponry, along with WMDs will damage the lands too much so aren't used by treaty. The exterior is armour plating like a real suit of armour over the internals.

Actually the Knight is full of features just made for looks; what's more, the exposed cabling is actually less practical than keeping it in the armour. In terms of the origin, they ARE meant to be pretty, otherwise they wouldn't show the loincloth heraldry or the emblem on the shield.

If you take a look at Feedback: http://d2ev13g7cze5ka.cloudfront.net/kby/kbyvi-063_7.jpg?v=1337039487 you can see the armour plating mostly covering the front side, no exposed cabling or piping, and the only things looking 'exposed' would be the joints and boosters (which is true for all of these walkers).

The Lahire: http://www.hlj.com/product/KBYVI-50/Sci is the opposite end of the spectrum, designed for speed. The arm joints show the obvious pistons with a front shield over them as it only is going to be attacking facing the target, so doesn't have the excess armour to make it lighter. The sloped design deflects shells to make up for the lack of bulk and heavy armour something like Sunshine has. The concept would be something that goes fast and jumps and boosts in and out like a Tau battlesuit.

http://www.hlj.com/product/KBYVI-073/Sci Vengeance is made from Junkyard parts, and is somewhat impractical with it's main weapon choice of six giant chainsaws, but what means business more than six of these?
1. The guns are mounted badly on the first one. It can only fire at what's really in front of it.
2. The second one has no armor and the sloped design isn't exactly something that would work in Warhammer 40K, and to say that a giant mech was made for speed outside of Eldar is silly.
3. The chainsaws are mounted on the shoulder. What exactly are you expecting them to hit?

Those things might be powerful in their own universe, but the look isn't 40k, the weaponry isn't 40k, and they certainly wouldn't last in 40k.

Darnok
18-03-2014, 22:46
http://www.hlj.com/product/KBYVI-073/Sci Vengeance is made from Junkyard parts, and is somewhat impractical with it's main weapon choice of six giant chainsaws, but what means business more than six of these?

Add some fitting bits and that thing could work for Orks.

Avatar_exADV
18-03-2014, 22:58
It's fair to note that, while many Japanese manufacturers certainly make attractive models, a lot of them aren't really suitable for use in a wargame. I would definitely want to spend some time with the superglue and reinforcing joints with brass rods before I dropped a 1/144 Gundam model on the table. (To be fair, it's not really reasonable to expect a pose-able display model to be as... robust as the average GW kit. Different objectives...

(It's also fair to remind everyone that criticizing Gundams for "not being practical" is silly - no humanoid robot is practical, whether it's Mazinger, Gundam, or a Titan. In-universe, they're all made of magic armor that makes it work...)

Poseidal
18-03-2014, 23:00
1. The guns are mounted badly on the first one. It can only fire at what's really in front of it.
2. The second one has no armor and the sloped design isn't exactly something that would work in Warhammer 40K, and to say that a giant mech was made for speed outside of Eldar is silly.
3. The chainsaws are mounted on the shoulder. What exactly are you expecting them to hit?

Those things might be powerful in their own universe, but the look isn't 40k, the weaponry isn't 40k, and they certainly wouldn't last in 40k.


I'm not suggesting they do fit into 40k. The settings would be totally different and you can't compare, but:

1. The joint allows a 30-45 degree cone in front of it. It's not too obvious in the picture.
2. We're not comparing in the 40k universe, but I can see an Eldar unit using similar proportions but swapped for Eldar stylings.
3. The shoulder mounting is for storage. The model is flexible enough so when it's equipped on the arm, it is capable of hitting anything in front of it.

I don't understand what you mean by 'wouldn't last in 40k'? they don't exist in the 40k setting, so they could be obsolete near-future walkers or lost DAOT super weapons or the pattern of an odd forgeworld or some new Tau large battlesuit or whatever you want, as they obviously aren't from the same place.

If you mean the aesthetic doesn't fit 40k, I agree.

Horus38
19-03-2014, 02:25
Add some fitting bits and that thing could work for Orks.

*low whistle* Yea, that would look pretty BA with some propah gubbins tacked onto it!

JPThunda
19-03-2014, 06:39
A well balanced army you say, spending 2 turns shooting at it you say. Sounds fine and balanced...

I've played several games with my Knight against several opponents. Against CSM one game it survived and I lost because the player simply helldraked my troops. In another, the knight was destroyed in a single turn by the devotion of a helldrake's vector strike, a forgefiend, and plasma guns to the flank. Against Eldar jetbike spam he won the day because he was largely impervious to their weapons, though he died after a combat with the Avatar and some good maneauvering with the Crimson Hunter Exarch. Against another Imperial player with his knight I flanked him with a drop dread with a melta, killing his knight, but ultimately lost my Knight to Dante and 5 infernus pistol sanguinary guard upon their arrival. He has been lackluster against Tyranids because I am remiss to engage flyrants and swarmlords who will likely kill him in close combat before he can strike, and many savvy Eldar players are spending the 10 points for Disarming Strike to neuter the Knight or any other character with a fancy weapon (Chapter Masters, etc.) and actively hunting him down in battles.

The Imperial Knight is just fine. It's an expensive fire magnet that had the courtesy to play into the current meta (mass S7 shooting) while making dedicated anti tank much more viable, and it forces your opponent to deal with it because of the threat of force. I have found it an exceptional addition to assault based armies, because it forces my opponent's guns away from my more vulnerable transports, but the Knight will not win any games for you out of hand unless your opponent is completely unprepared for any armor at all. A well balanced army spending 1-2 turns shooting their anti tank weapons at the Knight is perfectly balanced for the cost, and specialist units will remove it from the table without a second thought.

Tebrey
19-03-2014, 07:18
He has been lackluster against Tyranids because I am remiss to engage flyrants and swarmlords who will likely kill him in close combat before he can strike, and many savvy Eldar players are spending the 10 points for Disarming Strike to neuter the Knight or any other character with a fancy weapon (Chapter Masters, etc.) and actively hunting him down in battles.

In what way is an Imperial Knight a character? Disarming strike only works in challenges.

Mandragola
19-03-2014, 07:34
The Imperial Knight is just fine. It's an expensive fire magnet that had the courtesy to play into the current meta (mass S7 shooting) while making dedicated anti tank much more viable, and it forces your opponent to deal with it because of the threat of force. I have found it an exceptional addition to assault based armies, because it forces my opponent's guns away from my more vulnerable transports, but the Knight will not win any games for you out of hand unless your opponent is completely unprepared for any armor at all. A well balanced army spending 1-2 turns shooting their anti tank weapons at the Knight is perfectly balanced for the cost, and specialist units will remove it from the table without a second thought.

Right, yes. As many people have said already, one imperial knight really is totally fine. Things only become problematic when there are 3+ of them. The enemy may indeed put one down by firing all their AT at it or with a melta strike of some kind, but that still leaves several of the things hacking through their army, disabling the things that threaten them.

I'm glad you're having good games with yours.

Spiney Norman
19-03-2014, 08:02
http://www.hlj.com/product/KBYVI-073/Sci Vengeance is made from Junkyard parts, and is somewhat impractical with it's main weapon choice of six giant chainsaws, but what means business more than six of these?

This one did make me giggle, whoever thought that giving a mech a close combat arm that is as big as the whole of the rest of the mech was a good idea? The chainsaw arm looks like a conjoined twin who swapped his feet for chainsaws.

I guess the thing is, that's what you get if you buy cheap, I guess you really do get what you pay for.

Camman1984
19-03-2014, 14:30
I agree that ONE knight is fine, but multiples, without having the drawback of fielding squishy scoring units is too powerful. Imagine if the eldar could field an army of nothing but scoring wraithknights, or the tau an army of scoring riptides. Both of those options would be way too powerful, but thankfully the rules dont allow it.

Spider-pope
19-03-2014, 15:05
Yeah, A's a jerk. He purposefully tried to hide what army he was playing and tried springing it on the other guy at the last minute. Nevermind the silliness of accusing the guy of "list tailoring", when he went out of the way to look for a player with an army list totally unprepared to face what he was bringing to the table. Sounds like he wanted to play a God Mode game and pat himself on the back at the end after he slaughtered an army loaded up with heavy bolters and flamers. I would've taken about 30 seconds of that before telling the guy to get lost.

To be honest, he'd be a jerk whether or not it was Imperial Knights he was using. He gave a vague statement of what his army was, "imperial" which could be any of 8 different armies without counting Forgeworld lists. His intent was clearly to catch someone unprepared and it would not surprise me if he has or will do the same with other armies considered powerful.

I've yet to face an Imperial Knight on the tabletop, largely because i'm in the middle of a Fantasy campaign. I look forward to it though, whether it's 1, 3 or 5 of them.

Fizzy
19-03-2014, 15:09
Totally ignored and I wont play against it and neither will my friends. Just like we ignored Escalation and all other add ons we just play simple rulebook and codex with the addition of FW units or armies.

The Emperor
19-03-2014, 15:56
Totally ignored and I wont play against it and neither will my friends. Just like we ignored Escalation and all other add ons we just play simple rulebook and codex with the addition of FW units or armies.

Err... Codex: Imperial Knights is a codex.

Camman1984
19-03-2014, 16:07
I find it odd the idea of excluding certain units, fizzy's group is a perfect example of how groups all set their limit, basic rulebook, codex and forgeworld. If people are happy with that then its fine. But i find it starts to cause problems when a player is told he cang field his imperial knight, while he looks across at the forgeworld tau r'varna battlesuit that snuck in.

Not an attack at your group in particular, just an example of the risks exclusions can cause.

druchii
19-03-2014, 16:32
Totally ignored and I wont play against it and neither will my friends. Just like we ignored Escalation and all other add ons we just play simple rulebook and codex with the addition of FW units or armies.

Nevermind all Codeci are supplements, too. ;)

And the Knights have their own codex.

I'm genuinely curious: do you guys disallow things like quad riptide lists, or wave serpent spam, or screamer-stars?

d

deathspank
19-03-2014, 16:38
The Knight has to be one of the most popular things i have seen GW do in years, the model is frankly amazing, seriously get hold of the sprues and the decals and really get to grips with them, its a modelers wet dream, loads of future expansion possibilities for the army too, the kit and codex is a huge nod to the golden era of GW and frankly if your have been around as long as i have seeing Knights on the 40k table is a nostalgia dream come true, the UK site sold out of pre orders and everyone i know and game with has either got one or is picking one up to use in some capacity.
If you play 40k for fun and enjoyment then this is a great inclusion by GW, and i for one would be happy to see any number of crazy new units like the Knight to hit the board even if there rules make some people cry, its a bit of fun after all.

Bugaboo
19-03-2014, 16:41
Have they been blowing up on turn 1 like the Farseers predicted?

Zothos
19-03-2014, 16:44
Our group plays with no Escalation, Allies, formation dataslates, D-weapons or Void shield generators.

We allow them if a special scenario is being played, beyond that we leave the silliness out.

Oh, we also do not allow a 2+ rerollable save. Ever.

ismeno
19-03-2014, 17:07
Our group plays with no Escalation, Allies, formation dataslates, D-weapons or Void shield generators.

We allow them if a special scenario is being played, beyond that we leave the silliness out.

Oh, we also do not allow a 2+ rerollable save. Ever.

Do you play with Necron flying circus. Mon Oblit spam, Heldrake spam? Excluding something will only make something else the top dog.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Zothos
19-03-2014, 17:16
Do you play with Necron flying circus. Mon Oblit spam, Heldrake spam? Excluding something will only make something else the top dog.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, I am our Tau, Necron and Daemon player.

The most flyers I have ever used was 2. The most Riptides was 2. I have not, nor will I use a Screamerstar.

Our Chaos players each own one Heldrake.

We restrain ourselves because we want good, compelling games. Just because you can do a thing, does not mean you should.

Tebrey
19-03-2014, 17:29
Wow, just two riptides is restraining yourself...

My groups allows everything. We have lots of fun. If a player can't possibly compete against something, we don't use it (I don't use flyers vs nids, example). No one wants to be 'that guy'.

Zothos
19-03-2014, 17:43
Wow, just two riptides is restraining yourself...

Considering I did it once?

I have owned 3 since they came out. I play once a week or more. So I think using 2 Riptides in my Tau list for a single game in the approximately 30 I have played with Tau since the Codex came out would qualify as restraint.

I certainly think its better than facing 5 or 6 Av13 Superheavy walkers with D-weapons....

Kingly
19-03-2014, 17:49
THe knight isn't bust at all, it's so expensive and you can easily take him out with four imperial guard Storm Troopers armed with Melta guns. I think the model is so nice and reading deathspanks post makes me feel all warm and fuzzy! :D

IcedCrow
19-03-2014, 17:55
The Knight has to be one of the most popular things i have seen GW do in years, the model is frankly amazing, seriously get hold of the sprues and the decals and really get to grips with them, its a modelers wet dream, loads of future expansion possibilities for the army too, the kit and codex is a huge nod to the golden era of GW and frankly if your have been around as long as i have seeing Knights on the 40k table is a nostalgia dream come true, the UK site sold out of pre orders and everyone i know and game with has either got one or is picking one up to use in some capacity.
If you play 40k for fun and enjoyment then this is a great inclusion by GW, and i for one would be happy to see any number of crazy new units like the Knight to hit the board even if there rules make some people cry, its a bit of fun after all.

Yessir I totally agree :D

librerian_samae
19-03-2014, 18:18
I can only third the sentiment, wonderful and characterful kit which oozes all that encapsulates 40k to me, I have one and plan on 2 more (plus maybe more if forgeworld releases some variants). I running them as a secondary besides a load of vostroyans and 'scale' marines made from termis that I'm currently running using daemon hunters(grey nights whatever as I'm using cortez as a counts as colonel and a xenos inquisitor as a counts as magos) along with some dreads and a techmarine as counts as a legio cybernetica robot maniple.

I dont care how 'powerful' it might be, all the silly grimdark blanche style miniatures and concepts I can cram into a legal list with huge stompy robots, it's a modeling dream baby!!!!

Bring on more knights style expansions they add so much to the setting!

Camman1984
19-03-2014, 18:51
I have got to agree, with all the negative points about its codex being over powered, the model looks great, when the rumours came out i had images of everyone getting a baby carrier. What we got is fantastic and really looks like a heavy imperial walker should.

If they insist on a knight dex i kind of wish they had gone the way of the imperial armoured company list. Yeah you can spend loads of ponts for tons of heavy armour, but your infantry support squads have still got to be taken in order to score. Giving the enemy something to target and not wasting 9 weapons in every 10 man squad.

-Totenkopf-
19-03-2014, 18:53
Always good to have a back-up plan. Those 6% chances do happen. And of course, 6% chance of death in round 1, doesn't mean a 94% chance of everything being fine. The Wraithknight could well do a serious chunk of damage to the Knight, get killed in return and then have a Guardian with an Eldar Missile Launcher knock the Knight's last hull point off.

But yeah, overall, in a mano-e-mano between Wraithknight and a Knight, bet on the Knight. Not least because sometimes when he loses, he'll blow his killer up as well!

This is the camp I am in.. I ran several "challenges" within the bubble of a 1 v 1 on the table and the results were in the WK's favour.. Combat was happening around turn 3 and the IK was generally down a few HPs and the the WK got the charge.. It is actually amazing how much more maneuverable it is... This is all in the bubble of a 1v1... Add the context of a game where the WK can have wounds healed, be fortuned, guided, the IK can be doomed Etc...

Horus38
19-03-2014, 18:57
If they insist on a knight dex i kind of wish they had gone the way of the imperial armoured company list. Yeah you can spend loads of ponts for tons of heavy armour, but your infantry support squads have still got to be taken in order to score. Giving the enemy something to target and not wasting 9 weapons in every 10 man squad.

I'd disagree with this. Running 4 land raiders stops 9 out of 10 weapons in a squad. Knights can be glanced/penetrated by heavy bolters and autocannons. Running just Knights is by no means OP, and I'm glad they didn't saddle the list with some obligatory infantry which is what allies is for.

Camman1984
19-03-2014, 19:24
Good luck glancing or penning an AV13/12 vehicle with a heavy bolter :p.

Those land raiders, agian en masse are a bit too powerful, but they are easier to kill and the troops need to get out in order to score or if the vehicle pops, making them vulnerable to your anti-infantry.

I have found then IK vs WK the WK usually comes out on top, the wraithknight is just as dead if it has 6 wounds or 1 wound whereas a few hull points off the IK really starts to tip the balance in the favour of the wraithknight. Its also 150 points cheaper, so it shouldnt really even be close.

Mandragola
19-03-2014, 20:46
I do agree that knights are a really cool addition to 40k. Great model and rules that do work well as allies.

There's a lot of false equivalence here though. The land raider comparison for example. Land raiders don't score, don't have invulnerable saves, aren't superheavies and don't have destroyer close combat weapons. Facing 4 knights is not like facing 4 land raiders. Not at all.

A knight army behaves entirely unlike a tank army, like say the IG armoured company. It's just not at all a good comparison.

My impression from this thread, and it may be a false impression, is that the people saying knight-primary armies are fine have not seen them in action. There's nothing at all wrong with posting what you think would happen in a game but I do think it's a mistake to ignore the experiences of people who have used or faced knight armies.

I used a knight army and my impression from doing so is that I'd rather face anything else, with the possible exception of destroyer blast spam. It feels more powerful than the death star armies currently circulating, which I think it quite possibly tables.vi haven't tried that though - it's only a theory!

Horus38
19-03-2014, 21:08
Good luck glancing or penning an AV13/12 vehicle with a heavy bolter :p.

Don't have my book in front of me, thought they were AV11 in the rear?

Mandragola
19-03-2014, 21:40
Don't have my book in front of me, thought they were AV11 in the rear?

No, 12.

wftwg

Khornies & milk
19-03-2014, 22:05
Generally well received in my group, although not to the extent when first talked about.

We have 28 Knights so far amongst the 50 of us, but we won't be buying more until some of the other varients are created by GW or FW. I can easily see an Allied Detachment of a mix of Palladins/Errants, but not also field a Primary Detachment of 3 to 6 of the same 2 varients, and sure as hell not with that boring monopose 1-piece Leg malarky....a dynamic (movement-wise) looking squad it ain't.

So until other varients arrive we'll just stick with using our 1/2 - sized squads as Allies...although some of us are/have bought a Dreamforge Leviathan and will use it as our 'Baron' varient.

The kit is most definitely the best one GW has produced in years (arguably). Sure made my group drop more money into GW's account since the Embargo, which has been close to zero otherwise.

Lanacane
19-03-2014, 22:18
My local stores have sold 15 knights in total.. all by the owners and none is going to see the table in months.

Were they a hit? if you count GW staff buying them..

No-one else can afford the cost to run 3 for an army..

druchii
19-03-2014, 22:41
I do agree that knights are a really cool addition to 40k. Great model and rules that do work well as allies.

There's a lot of false equivalence here though. The land raider comparison for example. Land raiders don't score, don't have invulnerable saves, aren't superheavies and don't have destroyer close combat weapons. Facing 4 knights is not like facing 4 land raiders. Not at all.

A knight army behaves entirely unlike a tank army, like say the IG armoured company. It's just not at all a good comparison.

My impression from this thread, and it may be a false impression, is that the people saying knight-primary armies are fine have not seen them in action. There's nothing at all wrong with posting what you think would happen in a game but I do think it's a mistake to ignore the experiences of people who have used or faced knight armies.

I used a knight army and my impression from doing so is that I'd rather face anything else, with the possible exception of destroyer blast spam. It feels more powerful than the death star armies currently circulating, which I think it quite possibly tables.vi haven't tried that though - it's only a theory!

Yeah, there aren't many 1500pt armies that could deal with four paladins rocking faces. I also think the game would be completely boring to play. That's my secret hope that all those people wanting to have IK primary armies will get bored and shelve the concept.

d

Spiney Norman
19-03-2014, 23:53
Yeah, there aren't many 1500pt armies that could deal with four paladins rocking faces. I also think the game would be completely boring to play. That's my secret hope that all those people wanting to have IK primary armies will get bored and shelve the concept.

d

There is something to be said for a gaming group comprised primarily of poor students. There are so far only two knights in our group and one of them is mine.

Fizzy
20-03-2014, 02:08
Nevermind all Codeci are supplements, too. ;)

And the Knights have their own codex.

I'm genuinely curious: do you guys disallow things like quad riptide lists, or wave serpent spam, or screamer-stars?

d

That I know but we treat it as a non codex.

We allow the spams yes but no one uses it. No one likes flyers that much either. Maybe one per game. I often face Orks, Chaos marines and Imperial guard and my biggest problem is anti tank and anti infantry simply because they all use a lot of vehicles and spam cheap infantry supported by some heavier infantry.

Princey
20-03-2014, 15:26
Its a superb Kit, and i was genuinely surprised by the codex...Fluff that actually seems to make sense given the context! Games wise, im going up against one for the first time next week so we`ll see how that goes (orks are busily mass producing powerklaws even as we speak...). As far as the Knight primary detatchment thing goes, not sure im that worried about it tbh, surely they`ll have trouble with objectives??? (been a few days since i saw my friends codex, cant remember if they can score or not). Secondly, they`ll still get munched in combat by termies, mega-armoured nobs and the like. Pin em in combat, then stomp on whatever pitiful few troops your opponent has (of course this may all turn out to be baloney). oh, and ive a friend with an Iyanden wraith army just itching to say hello to a knight formation......

The Emperor
20-03-2014, 16:29
surely they`ll have trouble with objectives??? (been a few days since i saw my friends codex, cant remember if they can score or not).

The Knights in an Imperial Knight Primary Detachment are all Scoring Units.

Camman1984
20-03-2014, 16:37
They all score in a primary detachment, and with that big base you will struggle to contest any they are scoring.

Terminators and mega nobs are a good idea, but you will need a big squad, it will ignore their armour and invulnerables, striking well before them, then have all those hull points with an AV of 13 and a WS of 4. Even a full hammernator unit will struggle.

Assuming it gets the charge (it is movement 12" after all) whiffed with its cannon and kills 2 with its 4 destroyer attacks. You get 16 attacks, 8 hits and 2/3 hull points as you need 5's to glance. It then gets to stomp maybe kills some more with a 50% chance of getting at least 1 remove from play template. Your 450 pt squad is now severly depleted for little gain.

Konovalev
20-03-2014, 18:34
I like the model itself well enough. But I'm a bit disappointed in the lack of options. No ability to swap out the destroyer arm for another gun, only 2 different types of knights - or should I say gun choices because otherwise they are virtually identical.

But worst is the codex, I feel it is extremely bland and boring. The optional seneschal system is cute but is a clear last ditch attempt to inject a little variety into the codex.

As a unit I like knights, I have one and plan to incorporate it into my largely mechanized IG army. As their own army though... why? They look boring to play as.

draccan
20-03-2014, 18:47
Should never have been released before they included the missing knights and created a full blown codex.
Knights should never have been scoring units.
The army should always have had ground fire support troops, engineers, tech priests etc. to make it more balanced...
And there should have been more weaknesses for those point values or toned down the gun a bit and removed D from the chainsaw.

What you have now is a bland two model army and an unfinished codex that you will have to supplement with data slates or further hugely expensive hardcover books with more knights.

And at the end of the day even armies tailormade to destroy them will struggle hard against a 4 knight army. Or a 4 knight army with AA allies.

Oh and the companion is a rip off since it should have been included in the price in the same volume!

I love the model and for friendly fluffy games where there is a knight on both sides it could be fun or for apocalypse. Outside of that, not.

bork da basher
22-03-2014, 09:33
only one guy in our group bought one and he's not impressed with it on the tabletop. i don't think it's survived past turn 3 yet. the model however is superb and a bit of a industry changer it's just a shame it's rules are so lacklustre. i think it's success depends entirely on fielding multiples of them.

iv'e played against it once with my eldar and blew it away with little difficulty. the shield rules for it are a joke for such an expensive model.

Camman1984
22-03-2014, 10:19
I fought one with my eldar yesterday and didnt struggle with it at all. But my eldar has a lot of str 8-10 shooting. My space marines on the other hand struggle unless my melta team get the alpha strike.