Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

U02dah4 wrote:
I like the idea of 3/4 I just feel its two risky its fairly easy for a competent opponent to pop an armiger or two and then your big knights are not operating at full efficiency - plus a lot of the UK tournaments are played with tall dense terrain towering is still good but isn't quite as useful.

So competitively I think I've settled on two as the way to go but on lighter terrain 3 is perfectly valid

How is the terrain an issue? Fully blocks LoS? Seems like that would be a boon for concealing less Armigers. I feel like an open field might make the baby knights easier to kill off.

I am not sure I am going 3/3, because that feels risky, but 3/4 sounds like the sweet spot. Three big Knights shooting is just brutal. Especially when it is two Crusaders and a Warden.

Armigers benefit from any ruin. So going to terrain where towering doesn't give you automatic see the enemy isnt going to change armigers(they could hide anyway) but would make bigger knights less efficient as they cant' shoot as freely as in less 10th ed appropriate terrain

That's what I meant bigger knights are less efficient so I will probably take 2 rather than 3 given the terrain.

tneva82 wrote:
Armigers benefit from any ruin. So going to terrain where towering doesn't give you automatic see the enemy isnt going to change armigers(they could hide anyway) but would make bigger knights less efficient as they cant' shoot as freely as in less 10th ed appropriate terrain

How would terrain not give automatic LoS when we have Towering?

 em_en_oh_pee wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Armigers benefit from any ruin. So going to terrain where towering doesn't give you automatic see the enemy isnt going to change armigers(they could hide anyway) but would make bigger knights less efficient as they cant' shoot as freely as in less 10th ed appropriate terrain

How would terrain not give automatic LoS when we have Towering?

Towering doesn't allow you to shoot through solid wall...It just allows ignoring the ruins can't see even if you see model. You still need to physically be able to see with tlos.

Big solid wall between and towering isn't seeing anywhere. Towering isn't ignore tlos completely. It just means use tlos to see whether you can see or not.

tneva82 wrote:

 em_en_oh_pee wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Armigers benefit from any ruin. So going to terrain where towering doesn't give you automatic see the enemy isnt going to change armigers(they could hide anyway) but would make bigger knights less efficient as they cant' shoot as freely as in less 10th ed appropriate terrain

How would terrain not give automatic LoS when we have Towering?

Towering doesn't allow you to shoot through solid wall...It just allows ignoring the ruins can't see even if you see model. You still need to physically be able to see with tlos.

Big solid wall between and towering isn't seeing anywhere. Towering isn't ignore tlos completely. It just means use tlos to see whether you can see or not.

Are you seeing a lot of solid wall terrain? I haven't historically, but might just be the shops I play at. Usually it is GW terrain, which is almost always ruins with lots of openings.

Yes. And with 10th odds are it increases.

As is even in 9th it was normal here to have terrain that allows even knights to hide. When game is so lethal you need proper los blocking terrain.

LOS block, LOS block, LOS block.

tneva82 wrote:
Yes. And with 10th odds are it increases.

As is even in 9th it was normal here to have terrain that allows even knights to hide. When game is so lethal you need proper los blocking terrain.

LOS block, LOS block, LOS block.

Well, the game is now "less lethal" and I recall hearing 9th was really generous with how easy it was for infantry to hide, while now it seems to be less so thanks to Towering. So, this might be one of those major determining factors for which direction a player needs to go based on the anticipated terrain for the tournament they are playing in.

Whats everyone's opinion of fists vs chainswords on the questoris knight?

 em_en_oh_pee wrote:

Well, the game is now "less lethal" and I recall hearing 9th was really generous with how easy it was for infantry to hide, while now it seems to be less so thanks to Towering. So, this might be one of those major determining factors for which direction a player needs to go based on the anticipated terrain for the tournament they are playing in.

The only thing that's "less lethal" is melee, and even there it really depends on the unit, in every other scenario, "less lethal" is a meme just like "less rerolls".
Shooting output for our big boys either stayed the same or improved (Looking at you, battle cannon) even taking into account the lowered AP and easier to get cover saves.

 em_en_oh_pee wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 em_en_oh_pee wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Armigers benefit from any ruin. So going to terrain where towering doesn't give you automatic see the enemy isnt going to change armigers(they could hide anyway) but would make bigger knights less efficient as they cant' shoot as freely as in less 10th ed appropriate terrain

How would terrain not give automatic LoS when we have Towering?

Towering doesn't allow you to shoot through solid wall...It just allows ignoring the ruins can't see even if you see model. You still need to physically be able to see with tlos.

Big solid wall between and towering isn't seeing anywhere. Towering isn't ignore tlos completely. It just means use tlos to see whether you can see or not.

Are you seeing a lot of solid wall terrain? I haven't historically, but might just be the shops I play at. Usually it is GW terrain, which is almost always ruins with lots of openings.

Absolutely the WTC/UKTC standard style terrain was about 60% solid walls and I would expect that to increase over time


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Orik wrote:
Whats everyone's opinion of fists vs chainswords on the questoris knight?

Unless your tailoring to a specific IK on IK or big Tyranid battle the chainsword is better and certainly in an environment where you are potentially facing a variety of armies like a tournament.

However the scale of the difference isn't much so I wouldn't rebuild an existing knight

https://www.goonhammer.com/competitive-innovations-in-10th-showdowns-and-supermajors/

Some interesting Knight lists here. Notably the first place winner Ben Neal.

Lance (2000 Points)

Imperial Knights
Noble Lance
Strike Force (2000 Points)

CHARACTERS

Cerastus Knight Lancer (495 Points)
• 1x Cerastus shock lance

Cerastus Knight Lancer (495 Points)
• 1x Cerastus shock lance

Knight Crusader (475 Points)
• Warlord
• 1x Avenger gatling cannon
1x Heavy flamer
1x Questoris heavy stubber
1x Questoris heavy stubber
1x Rapid-fire battle cannon
1x Stormspear rocket pod
1x Titanic feet

BATTLELINE

Armiger Warglaive (140 Points)
• 1x Meltagun
1x Reaper chain-cleaver
1x Thermal spear

Armiger Warglaive (140 Points)
• 1x Meltagun
1x Reaper chain-cleaver
1x Thermal spear

Armiger Warglaive (140 Points)
• 1x Meltagun
1x Reaper chain-cleaver
1x Thermal spear

ALLIED UNITS

Callidus Assassin (115 Points)
• 1x Neural shredder
1x Phase sword and poison blades

That is a bold choice!

I'm having a panic now my fellow knight players, I can live with the nerf that's coming for the re roll clarification but now some people are saying per model activation as in Crusader fires all weapons but in all that shooting has ONE singular hit roll of 1 to reroll and same for a wound. It's my understanding that's it's at the very least like in 9th per weapon profile. Or I cry.

MasterfulKane wrote:
I'm having a panic now my fellow knight players, I can live with the nerf that's coming for the re roll clarification but now some people are saying per model activation as in Crusader fires all weapons but in all that shooting has ONE singular hit roll of 1 to reroll and same for a wound. It's my understanding that's it's at the very least like in 9th per weapon profile. Or I cry.

News to me. Where did you hear that? The Tacoma ruling wasn't like that.

Without Any rerolls its only a drop of 13% with a single reroll we are still 97% on the melta cannon and if you don't use it you buff another weapon instead

In practice dropping from full rerolls of 1 to a singular reroll per weapon is a big drop in firepower its not that big to drop from one reroll per weapon to one per model when your hitting on 2's

The change is now live at whc

tneva82 wrote:
The change is now live at whc

LAY LOW THE TYRANT
■ Oath Ability: Each time this model is selected to
shoot or fight, re-roll a single Hit roll of 1 and re-roll a
single Wound roll of 1.

Oof. I don't know if we needed another nerf. I was just glancing at Goonhammers reporting and the number of Knight lists seems to have sharply declined.

With every change we get, I feel more hemmed in with list choices.

More tourney results

Well, Knights seem to have been diminishing in turnout and these couple of events had only one CK list. Aeldari still dominating and Custodes and GSC also performing well. Did we get squeezed out with our nerfs?

I think we are about balanced. However I would expect Aeldari and GSC to get nerfed at the next balance check where as I would expect us to stay the same which would improve are win percentage

The big negative for us would be if codex SM is broken but it doesn't look that way given half the firstborn have gone.

We got a Knight player with triple Knights that placed 2nd at Board Room Brawl 2023.


On the Goonhammer rundown, there was only one other Knight list, which was a 2/6 version and it didn't place particularly high. Obviously, feels like the vast majority of the lists were Aeldari, GSC and Custodes. Can't wait for that balance adjustment to come through, because this meta looks depressingly limited and lopsided.

Oh, on more note... WarCom posted us at a 57% win rate, which seems to include pre-nerf wins. So... Here's hoping we don't get yet another nerf.

I think some of that is dataset dependent. Knights are a tough list for rookies to beat.

When you only factor large events thet are not doing so well and they are not winning many events because the well made competitive lists are able to beat knights. I hope they are not nerfed I would rather GSC and Aeldari were and the bottom lists were brought up.

On a plus note I've confirmed my first tourney list of 10th in two weeks.

1 x Castigator
2 x Crusader (one battle cannon one thermal)
1 x Helverin
3 x Warglaive

U02dah4 wrote:
I think some of that is dataset dependent. Knights are a tough list for rookies to beat.

When you only factor large events thet are not doing so well and they are not winning many events because the well made competitive lists are able to beat knights. I hope they are not nerfed I would rather GSC and Aeldari were and the bottom lists were brought up.

On a plus note I've confirmed my first tourney list of 10th in two weeks.

1 x Castigator
2 x Crusader (one battle cannon one thermal)
1 x Helverin
3 x Warglaive

You can't do a BC and TC on a Crusader. One of the guns must be an Avenger.

 em_en_oh_pee wrote:

U02dah4 wrote:
I think some of that is dataset dependent. Knights are a tough list for rookies to beat.

When you only factor large events thet are not doing so well and they are not winning many events because the well made competitive lists are able to beat knights. I hope they are not nerfed I would rather GSC and Aeldari were and the bottom lists were brought up.

On a plus note I've confirmed my first tourney list of 10th in two weeks.

1 x Castigator
2 x Crusader (one battle cannon one thermal)
1 x Helverin
3 x Warglaive

You can't do a BC and TC on a Crusader. One of the guns must be an Avenger.

Two Crusaders. One has a Battle Cannon, one has a Thermal Cannon. They both have Avengers.

Oh lord, can you tell I hadn't woken up fully yet? Sheesh. Reading comp fail.

Surprised to see you going 3/4 vs 2/6. The latter seems to be the rage, plus assassins.

I considered it and your probably right that armiger heavy with an assassin is probably slightly more optimal but truth is I don't think their is to much in it and this build seemed more fun.

Another 3/3 split takes a top spot at HWP Salty Classic GT.

Salt Army (1995 points)
Imperial Knights
Strike Force (2000 points)
Noble Lance

CHARACTER

Canis Rex (490 points)
• 1x Chainbreaker las-impulsor
1x Chainbreaker multi-laser
1x Freedom’s Hand

Cerastus Knight Castigator (485 points)
• Warlord
• 1x Castigator bolt cannon
1x Tempest warblade

Knight Crusader (475 points)
• 1x Avenger gatling cannon
1x Heavy flamer
1x Meltagun
1x Stormspear rocket pod
1x Thermal cannon
1x Titanic feet

BATTLELINE

Armiger Helverin (145 points)
• 2x Armiger autocannon
1x Armoured feet
1x Questoris heavy stubber

Armiger Helverin (145 points)
• 2x Armiger autocannon
1x Armoured feet
1x Questoris heavy stubber

Armiger Warglaive (140 points)
• 1x Meltagun
1x Reaper chain-cleaver
1x Thermal spear

ALLIED UNITS

Callidus Assassin (115 points)
• 1x Neural shredder
1x Phase sword and poison blades

Simple enough formula. Eager to get my Castigator built so I can give this a try.

Crucible 2023 Warhammer 40K Major

82-player, 7-round Major in Orlando, Florida, US on September 29 2023.

Brian Jones Crucible (2000 Points)

Imperial Knights
Noble Lance
Strike Force (2000 Points)

CHARACTERS

Canis Rex (460 Points)
• 1x Chainbreaker las-impulsor
1x Chainbreaker multi-laser
1x Freedom’s Hand

Cerastus Knight Lancer (525 Points)
• 1x Cerastus shock lance
• Enhancements: Banner of Macharius Triumphant

Knight Crusader (510 Points)
• Warlord
• 1x Avenger gatling cannon
1x Heavy flamer
1x Meltagun
1x Thermal cannon
1x Titanic feet
• Enhancements: Mysterious Guardian

BATTLELINE

Armiger Warglaive (150 Points)
• 1x Questoris heavy stubber
1x Reaper chain-cleaver
1x Thermal spear

Armiger Warglaive (150 Points)
• 1x Questoris heavy stubber
1x Reaper chain-cleaver
1x Thermal spear

ALLIED UNITS

Callidus Assassin (90 Points)
• 1x Neural shredder
1x Phase sword and poison blades

Eversor Assassin (75 Points)
• 1x Executioner pistol
1x Power sword and neuro gauntlet

Inquisitorial Henchmen (40 Points)
• 4x Inquisitorial Acolyte
• 4x Acolyte firearm
4x Acolyte melee weapon
1x Plasma pistol

Now that is a surprise to see! Three big, two small! Eversor too!? Wild.

It's a cool list, but I think it got dumptrucked by Tyranids in the final game at that tournament.

 ZergSmasher wrote:
It's a cool list, but I think it got dumptrucked by Tyranids in the final game at that tournament.

100-64, though apparently the mission heavily favored the Tyranids.