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.

Greetings, my esteemed enthusiasts of big, noble robots that stomp around! There's a new index out, so it's time for a fresh discussion. Let us gather here to exchange tactics for Imperial Knights. The goal is to make the most of the new rules.To kick things off, I thought we could chat about the different units and choices we have and rank them in a tier list.

I think knights are really stong probably in the top 5 indexes

So in my oppinion the tier list looks like this:

S:
Acastus Knight Porphyrion
Cerastus Knight Lancer (better than the Gallant in every way)

A:
Canis Rex ( sustained hits 1 on 5+ it pretty nuts. Does 75% more damage than the preceptor )
Cerastus Knight-Castigator (like a warden but better, really good shooting)
Helverin
Paladin
Castellan
Valliant
Cerastus Knight Lancer (better than the Gallant in every way)

B:
Warglaive
Crusader
Acastus Knight Asterius

C:
Errant, Preceptor
Mechanicum Knight Moirax
Cerastus Knight-Atrapos
Questoris Knight Styrix

D:
Cerastus Knight-Acheron
Gallant
Questoris Knight Magaera

I will expand this post in the next days and talk about my reasoning for this list.

For the time being we are going to be one of the strongest lists. The addition of towering is godsent compared to 9th ed. We will have to see how long it lasts

M.

They are winning a few of the early 10e tournaments. It will take a while for people to get a handle of heavy armor type lists.

Canis looks good but doesnt appear as often as I would have thought.

It looks like most of the lists people are playing are their old 9th Armiger-heavy lists. Most folks haven't had a chance to build a Canis Rex yet.

Also, for the OP, the Lancer is looking like a top tier choice.

A lot of the Forge World Knights are looking good. Even the Porphyrion might actually be a good choice, although it doesn't have the synergy of some of the others. The Magaera is going to be paying for its past sins, it seems, as it's kind of trash now.

My current build list:

Reclaim the Realm

Cerastus Knight Lancer
[430]

Knight Valiant
2x SBM, 1x SBC
Mysterious Guardian
[525]

Knight Warden
Stormspear, Meltagun
Unyielding Paragon
[420]

Armiger Warglaive
Meltagun
[140]

Armiger Warglaive
Meltagun
[140]

Armiger Warglaive
Meltagun
[140]

Armiger Warglaive
Meltagun
[140]

[1975]

I have ...a long way to go. Warglaives and Valiant are still in their boxes. But I feel like this is gonna be a solid way to go. Debating on making the Warden Mythic Hero and adding the Banner to the Cerastus.

 Miguelsan wrote:
For the time being we are going to be one of the strongest lists. The addition of towering is godsent compared to 9th ed. We will have to see how long it lasts

M.

Wonder how long before tournaments alter terrain to negate benefits of towering. Solid walls aplenty and knight aren't shooting at impunity.

tneva82 wrote:

 Miguelsan wrote:
For the time being we are going to be one of the strongest lists. The addition of towering is godsent compared to 9th ed. We will have to see how long it lasts

M.

Wonder how long before tournaments alter terrain to negate benefits of towering. Solid walls aplenty and knight aren't shooting at impunity.

Generally speaking I love how modern 10th feels, but I'm kind of shocked how dated the LOS and measuring rules are in general.

Changes to Towering are coming. Plus point changes. I'm expecting a kneejerk nerf for us. Hopefully it's not AdMech levels of crushing.

 em_en_oh_pee wrote:
Changes to Towering are coming. Plus point changes. I'm expecting a kneejerk nerf for us. Hopefully it's not AdMech levels of crushing.

how do you know?

Warhammer community had article saying so

GW just released a balance update, and we got WALLOPED! Basically 15% increases to all the big knights except the Gallant, and Canis Rex perhaps got hit hardest of all. I get that they were trying to balance the benefits of Towering, but this is gonna hurt. We're probably back to running 2 big and however many little knights will fit with them. Which sucks, because I play Knights to run the big guys.

Point Changes:
Canis Rex +85
Castellan +70
Crusader +60
Errant +55
Paladin +60
Preceptor +85
Valiant +75
Warden +60
Asterius +110
Porphyrion +100
Acheron +60
Atrapos +55
Castigator +60
Lancer +65
Magaera +60
Styrix +65

Massive points hike across the board for us.

However, it sure seems like what we are paying for is no changes to Towering (for now).

This really shakes up most lists, as we now have to actually ask ourselves how many big/small Knights to take.

EDIT:
My previously posted list went up 200pt. Oooooof. That is more than just cutting an Armiger, that is having to really trim out something strategic.

After re-working it to keep the original concept intact:


And here is a list still packing a trio of Big Knights, but brings along four Armigers too:

I can live with the point increase as long as Towering is unchanged. I'll say a sad goodbye to my Dominus + 4 Questoris list.

M.

With the new points costs, one list I've come up with is Crusader, Warden, Paladin, 2 Helverins, 2 Warglaives, and give the Warden Mythic Hero. No room in there for an Assassin or any Voidsmen or Exaction guys. Not sure only running 7 models will cut it in 10th, although Towering is a powerful mechanic (hence the points hikes). The only good news for me personally is that my current collection does support this build with no additional models needed.

Castigator 2x Crusader 4 x Warglaive for me

It's a shame I feel like what's disappeared is any leeway for fun stuff like augments moiraxs or even exacation squads rather than fix towering it feels like you need to get maximum value out of it

ZergSmasher wrote:With the new points costs, one list I've come up with is Crusader, Warden, Paladin, 2 Helverins, 2 Warglaives, and give the Warden Mythic Hero. No room in there for an Assassin or any Voidsmen or Exaction guys. Not sure only running 7 models will cut it in 10th, although Towering is a powerful mechanic (hence the points hikes). The only good news for me personally is that my current collection does support this build with no additional models needed.

Yeah, this seems to be the formula I am seeing on social media. Some folks are skipping Mythic to go for 2x Crusaders instead of the Crusader/Paladin.

U02dah4 wrote:Castigator 2x Crusader 4 x Warglaive for me

It's a shame I feel like what's disappeared is any leeway for fun stuff like augments moiraxs or even exacation squads rather than fix towering it feels like you need to get maximum value out of it

Exactly. We lost a lot of that wiggle room that made us have options. I feel like lists are now congealing around the 3/4 model as Zerg posted (or variations like I mentioned).

One thing I keep hearing is that, despite the ridiculous increase in price, the Acastus Porphyrion is still an absolute beast. Like oppressively so.

Of course, it is so pricey it is hard to make a list that doesn't skimp on baby knights. Since I have an unassembled Acastus, I am going to try this list out whenever I get that big dude built:

The argument against the porphyria is that you have had to drop to 5 models and that going to impact your ability to do objectives and you will be getting less value out of the bondsman on the Crusader especially as a good opponent will focus your helverin.

U02dah4 wrote:
The argument against the porphyria is that you have had to drop to 5 models and that going to impact your ability to do objectives and you will be getting less value out of the bondsman on the Crusader especially as a good opponent will focus your helverin.

Yes, but again, I hear the Porphyrion's damage output makes up for it. Sadly, I have no table time to back this claim up - just the scuttlebutt on social media.

Could go to a 2/5 split. Porphyrion, Warden w/ Mythic, and 5 Armigers (3/2 split?). This would even have enough points to put Mysterious Guardian on the Acastus, just in case you need to reposition it.

I don't have a lot of time to practice and I was wondering what peoples thoughts are on

Canis rex vs Castigator

And 3 warglaives 1 helverin vs 4 warglaive

My gut is the castigators shooting outweighs canis rex's Superior melee

And the warglaive is more effective at dealing with the threats to knights

What do you all think?

U02dah4 wrote:
I don't have a lot of time to practice and I was wondering what peoples thoughts are on

Canis rex vs Castigator

And 3 warglaives 1 helverin vs 4 warglaive

My gut is the castigators shooting outweighs canis rex's Superior melee

And the warglaive is more effective at dealing with the threats to knights

What do you all think?

Castigator is, based on raw numbers, one of our best shooting units that also has solid CC.

I think the Warglaive/Helverin ratio matters more based on your Bondsman options.

The TOs at a the Tacoma Open (GW tournament/TOs) have supposedly ruled for that tournament only that Lay Low the Tyrants is re-roll a single hit roll of one and a single wound roll of one, not all.

Likely hints at what be in the first FAQ regarding this.

Has no bearing- in other languages the translation is multiple and it's ambiguous in English the intention is therefore clear

A tourney can rule differently but that's just a house rule

U02dah4 wrote:
Has no bearing- in other languages the translation is multiple and it's ambiguous in English the intention is therefore clear

A tourney can rule differently but that's just a house rule

The ruling came from someone on the GW Organized Play team, if I recall correctly. Expect this to be the FAQ we get for LLTT.

It was clear it was intended as all unless its in an faq it does not matter

When it is faq'd it is faq'd and it is probably needed for balance until then individual tournaments are free to deviate as they see fit both WTC and UKTC have gone down the same route and I agree it will probably happen but it hasn't happened yet so enjoy it while you can.

Two questions.

Am i allowed to take 4 armigers? I assumed rule of 3 is still in play but two boxes make 4.

Where do i find the towering rule?

The word TOWERING is found twice in the core rulebook, once on the Woods page and once on the Ruins page, both in the Terrain Features section. You can search for words in the PDF rulebook and designer commentary which is quite a good way to find these things.

You can only take three of each datasheet unless it is battleline and then you can take six.

Armiger Warglaives and Armiger Helverins are battleline.

So are the armiger moiraxs


What do we think since the pts adjustment if we are takeing two big knights and six armigers are we better off with two assassins or a 7th armiger to finish it off.

U02dah4 wrote:
So are the armiger moiraxs


What do we think since the pts adjustment if we are takeing two big knights and six armigers are we better off with two assassins or a 7th armiger to finish it off.

From what I'm seeing, 3/4 is still popular. 3/3 too. Leans into Towering and maximizes Bondsman benefits.

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