Warhammer-Empire.com

The General Archive => Empire Army Book 8th Edition => Rare => Topic started by: WallyTWest on May 20, 2009, 02:01:42 AM

Title: Lord Knights
Post by: WallyTWest on May 20, 2009, 02:01:42 AM
Have a unit of lord knights, similar to the Blood Knights and Chaos Knights of other books. Just high end knights who cost a boat load and can hold their own against basic low end rank and file. No knightly order, just high profile warlords/knights who are heroes in their own right.

WS5, S4, T3, I4, 2A, Ld 8
Full Knight Equipment and benifits from stubborn and immune to panic.
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: der Hurenwiebel on May 20, 2009, 05:47:07 AM
so basically a return to the really old school knights of the high helm, panther and so forth from 3rd ed.  what points cost would you give them?

Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Uryens de Crux on May 20, 2009, 09:40:55 AM
The answer to death star units is not to have our own, but to get rid of everyone elses.

But that aint going to happen is it  : :icon_evil:
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Toro_Blanco on May 20, 2009, 01:57:48 PM
I agree; I think our current knights are powerful enough.  I think the fact that our heavy cavalry, armed with lances, can charge an enemy in the flank and scratch them at best is a sad testament to how overpowered some other choices are.

I really think our army needs minimal tweaking and few, if any, new units.  What needs to happen is overpowered armies have to be brought into line.
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: der Hurenwiebel on May 21, 2009, 05:36:07 AM
check out these old and moldy stats

knight panther 28.5 points
m8 ws5,bs4, s4,t4,w1,i5,a2,ld9 hatred vs chaos, frenzy
all other equipment the same as current knights

High helms 42 points
m8,ws5,bs5,s5,t5,w2,i5,a2,ld8
stubborn
again all other equipment the same as current knights

these two examples taken from the 1987 ravening hordes book that came out between 2nd and third edition

Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Uryens de Crux on May 21, 2009, 07:41:59 AM
Difference is, in those days the whole mechanics were completely different, so while they are impressive stats, they dont particularly translate to todays game.
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Nicholas Bies on May 21, 2009, 01:51:29 PM
tbh I like the idea. I don't believe they should be as powerful as Blood or Chaos knights. Maybe more along the lines of Grail knights without the ward save.

So WS5, BS3, Str4, Tou3, W1 2A LD8, Stubborn, full plate, lances and shield or Great weapons  35pts.

Champion +1A - 16pts
Battle Standard - 16pts may have a 50pt banner (or 55pts? hehe)
Musician- 8pts

If joined by a Grandmaster rather then becoming Immune to Psych they become Unbreakable
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Zub on May 21, 2009, 01:53:13 PM
Blood knihts, Chaos knights and such things are overpowered stupidities and we should not try to have something like that. It only spoils the game.
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Uryens de Crux on May 21, 2009, 02:06:51 PM
Yes, we should remain proud in our lack of cheese.
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: wissenlander on May 21, 2009, 02:23:32 PM
I know IC knights aren't up to this level, but that would negate what they are supposed to be, which is the elite knights of the Empire.  I don't really think having character units is really a great trend to repeat, and I hope it's only the exception and doesn't become the rule.
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Nicholas Bies on May 21, 2009, 04:23:29 PM

Well my thinking

Regular knights = Core
Inner-Circle = special (and perfectly priced for it as well)
Noble Knights = rare.

BTW staying away from cheese isn't the same as updating the list, what i proposed isn't going to be a crazy unit, we don't have the banners that the vampires do nor do we have the strength of chaos knights. Fact is other armies are not going to get nerfed to suit our needs.
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Uryens de Crux on May 21, 2009, 04:53:44 PM
No they arent, but I am happy to play a list that loses over one that wiffs.
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: wissenlander on May 21, 2009, 05:46:59 PM
BTW staying away from cheese isn't the same as updating the list, what i proposed isn't going to be a crazy unit, we don't have the banners that the vampires do nor do we have the strength of chaos knights. Fact is other armies are not going to get nerfed to suit our needs.

This exercise (as a whole) is to balance out, and make effective, everything in our list.  Each unit should fit a role within the army, and if one unit that could potentially be acceptable under the current circumstances would be allowed, it may unbalance things if other units or items were also upgraded.  Does that statement make any sense the way I typed it? :unsure:
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Inarticulate on May 21, 2009, 06:20:20 PM
Pfft I must say I detest this idea.

You basically want Grail Knights in an empire army without lance but unbreakable and with full plate...

Kinda sucks to be Brets if that happens.
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: warhammerlord_soth on May 24, 2009, 05:33:05 AM

Doesn't it always ? :engel:

And I dislike the idea as well.

The Empire has put its faith in gunpowder rather than knights, and they reflect that, which is fine.
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: shavixmir on May 24, 2009, 09:53:06 AM
Lord knights?
I'm not in favour.

The Empire is human and not super-powered or uberistic (there was going to be a third superlatitive, but nothing came to mind... it's just one of those Sundays).
Just because Chaos, undead and every other genetically screwed up odd-ball army has sharks in the goldfish bowl, doesn't mean that we should too.

I think the empire's strengths should be diversity and detachments.
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Nicholas Bies on May 24, 2009, 03:31:12 PM
detachments aren't a strength. Detachments are a gimick put in place because the games designers realize that human infantry can't go toe-to-toe with almost any other infantry unit in the game bar clan rats and goblins (without nets).

Detachments aren't a strength they're a saving grace because without them our infantry wouldn't be anything better then Bret. Peasants which are just meat shields and static CR for their cavalry.

Diversity is a strength and really the only reasonable argument against such a unit.

There is currently 6 Cavalry options (incl. Hammer and lanced / IC hammer +lance, pistoliers, outriders) even if Hammer based units aren't often chosen.

There are currently 6 Infantry units (sword, spear, halberd, free coy, Flaggies, Greatswords). So in that respect yes there shouldn't be a unit that tips it one way or the other as other empire units (artillery, Stanks) can work with a force based on either option.

Mind you I haven't included Archers, Crossbows and Handguns which really would be more seen in an Infantry based force then Cavalry but they aren't what I consider "fighting" units more support units.

Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: t12161991 on May 24, 2009, 04:04:50 PM
How does that make detachments a gimmick? By that definition, Wood Elves moving through trees is a gimmick. Dark Elves hating everyone is a gimmick. Vampires restoring wounds is a gimmick.

It represents the tactical nature of the Imperial forces.
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Luther kampf on May 27, 2009, 02:32:07 PM
hey
about the super knight, i don't think we should have any knights nearly as powerful as chaos knights. seen from a pure fluff perspective, there is no way in hell a human could be nearly as powerfull as either a full regiment of mounted  vampires or chosen warriors of chaos riding deamon steeds.
seen from a tactical wievpoint, my opinion on the matter is that we shoudn't have 'em either. it's simply not the empire way to have über killing units.

luther
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Endgame on May 29, 2009, 12:17:48 AM
For Rare knights, I'd just be happy if they gave Knights of the White Wolf the old Cav hammer rules back and made them rare.  At least I'd have a use for all my old WW Knights.

To make it more worth the Rare Slot, make the Cav hammer 1 handed and make White Wolf Knights always Inner Circle.   So S4, +2 on the Charge, +1 following rounds with a 1+ save.  Slightly better than Inner Circle knights but using a rare slot.
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Victor on July 07, 2009, 08:38:00 PM
Two attacks is probably a bad idea. But how about the following: You need a Grandmaster in the army, then you can upgrade one unit of IC knights (S4, I4) to WS5. (Maybe a special rule that gives the unit +1 for combat resolution  :-D) ... for 30pts per model ?
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: MagicJuggler on July 07, 2009, 10:30:43 PM
What about an option to allow cavalry detachments? A unit of Knights can take up to 2 detachments of fast cavalry (not Outriders). You have the countercharge, stand and shoot, and support charge abilities as normal but with a 6" radius to represent the wider area that cavalry units work in tandem with each other. In addition, there's a third option: Shoot and Charge.

If a unit of knights has a detachment of light cavalry armed with weapons which allow for move and shoot, if they successfully charge an enemy, the detachment cavalry may move within 6 inches of the parent unit to shoot the enemy that's being engaged. Shots in this manner do not cause panic tests, but (depending on game balance) would count as close combat casualties for CR and (defender strikes back) purposes.

While Empire-wise this would represent pistoliers/carbineers firing into dense ranks to disrupt their formation for a cavalry charge, if you want to design a more ancients-themed army, then it would easily represent Roman equites pinning infantry in place with javelins, or Byzantine Cataphract tactics. Of course, making it so that light cavalry doesn't cause panic in their heavier bretheren would also give Empire an equivalent to Chaos Will of the Gods (in regards to Marauder Cav), Orc&Goblin Size Matters (Goblin Light Cav), Knights' Vow/Peasant's Duty (Mounted Yeomen)...really, any non-Elf light cavalry user.

In short, adapting the Detachment system to work for cavalry would work more to give Imperial knights and light cavalry a distinct play-style to compensate for lack of statistical overpoweredness.
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Helborg on August 10, 2009, 12:05:48 AM
Yes, we should remain proud in our lack of cheese.

*Points at steam tank*  :engel:


Sanj
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Freman Bloodglaive on August 10, 2009, 09:49:09 AM
Points at War Alter and two steam tanks.

Then points at Chaos Deamon army.
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Brionne on August 10, 2009, 10:01:22 AM
tbh I like the idea. I don't believe they should be as powerful as Blood or Chaos knights. Maybe more along the lines of Grail knights without the ward save.

So WS5, BS3, Str4, Tou3, W1 2A LD8, Stubborn, full plate, lances and shield or Great weapons  35pts.
Oh hell no. That's the Grail Knight statline, but with Stubborn (albeit without ward save) for three points less! Grail Knights are supposed to be the very, very best - beaten only by Vampires who have spent 300 years honing their skills. They're not supposed to be this common in the Empire.  They should at least be 42 points.
Quote
Champion +1A - 16pts
Battle Standard - 16pts may have a 50pt banner (or 55pts? hehe)
Musician- 8pts

If joined by a Grandmaster rather then becoming Immune to Psych they become Unbreakable

Seriously, this is too powerful.
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: warhammerlord_soth on August 10, 2009, 10:10:12 AM
Seriously, this is too powerful.

Yeah, they're almost Bretonnian Grail Knights then....
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Inarticulate on August 10, 2009, 02:44:39 PM
However, in the next update of the Brets book, I can see Grail knights becoming the match of Blood Knights.

GW will just uber up one unit in each book so everyone can death star :). I can see an excellent future ahead.

I might just start playing 6th ed again.
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Fandir Nightshade on August 10, 2009, 02:46:43 PM
Well....or they won´t as right now Warriors of Chaos were fine and the lizards except for the giant lizard lists are fine too.
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Toro_Blanco on August 10, 2009, 06:30:36 PM
I'm certainly in favor of some non-gunpowder rare units for Empire, but I'm just not sure what.  Maybe slightly beefed up IC knights (since we are so hard pressed for special slots as it is), or perhaps full-plate infantry (an interesting idea someone brought up in that thread).

I am not in favor of Death Star units, at all.  To me, it's basically a form of Herohammer: tool up your lord and death star unit, then buy cheap filler for the rest of your meaningless army.  Whoever hits the other person the hardest with their hammer, wins.  It destroys any sense of strategy or tactics, because each side pretty much has one unit that can fight, and the rest exist purely because they HAVE to in order for the list to be legal (I am certain if you removed minimum core units, you'd see VC lists with just a blood knight unit and nothing more).

There's nothing wrong with wanting an elite knightly order for us, but let's be reasonable: Empire is not the army known for its powerhouse cavalry, Brettonia is.  Empire is known for its versatility, gunpowder, and stout infantry.  If anything, IC knights should be moved to rare and we should be given better infantry for a special choice.
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Hurin Thalion on August 14, 2009, 02:51:22 PM
I really think our army needs minimal tweaking and few, if any, new units.  What needs to happen is overpowered armies have to be brought into line.

I hate the "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" philosophy as much as the next guy but let's face it; this is GW we're talking about. They probably overpower certain units ON PURPOSE so the kids who are spending their parents' money go "ooh! Bluud Nites iz da koolest! They is made of win!" and shell out $80 for a set.
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: iatroblast on August 17, 2009, 12:21:47 AM
I believe we are commanding an army of men. And that could be bad sometimes...
...because Humans have their weaknesses which they must also exist in the game! If we make a unit as powerful as Chaos or Blood knights, then we'll end up with "superman" ('we all know that'! I know....)
On the other hand, Bretonnia has Questing and Grail knights! Well... that's almost an unexplained thing to do if you think that no normal man can be so powerful!
What Bretonnian knights truly represents here, is a fairytale: "King Arthur and his Round Table" -the knighthood at its finest! -stupid? too much? an extreme thing to represent? probably! But that's what they are! A fairy tale's representation!

I wouldn't mind if we hadn't as strong knights as they have! But if I wanted to further involve and improve my knightly orders, I'd ask for new more effective Magic Banners rather than better Statistics
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Nicholas Bies on August 26, 2009, 04:49:30 AM
What about dropping IC knights from Special and giving them +1WS and +1str (so WS5, str4) and making them rare.
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Freman Bloodglaive on September 04, 2009, 10:01:47 AM
They'd never get taken.

Questing Knights aren't superhuman, they're really just slightly better Knights of the White Wolf. Grail Knights are supposed to be superhuman, having drunken from the Grail and having been changed into the Lady's champions.
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Derek Contyre on September 06, 2009, 08:55:48 AM
If we make any powerful knightly unit over 40 pts then i demand chaos knights. . . 40 pts for t4 and s5!!!!!!!  Hell why should we pay more for a measly T3 and s4?   

Also the imperial knights aren't inferior to brettonian knights just because. . .
Our knights are representing a differant fighting and warfare style compared to brettonia. The brettonian army is designed to be built around knightly units and so they have rules representing that. Our main units are infantry with detachements, not knights. Sure we can put in a rare slot for power knights, but where is the background for it? Why not take units of Kislevite winged lancers as rare?

That would put a decent cavalry unit in our rare slots without taking away from our special. . .
Thoughts?
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: wissenlander on October 08, 2009, 01:52:18 PM
Putting the Kislevites back in in general would make a lot of people happy.  I don't know if they'll do that though as it's blending.  I wouldn't mind some of the options from 5th edition, but doubt it'll ever be like that again.
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Derek Contyre on October 08, 2009, 08:32:02 PM
But Kislev is basically part of the empire anyway now that archaon ran straight through them in the soc. We could make the tzarina empress of kislev but becomes an elector in the empire.

So they can either bring out a new stand alone kislevite army or make like a supplement empire book.
Hold up, new idea forms.

warhammer armies, the empire. Allies. We can have it as a sort of expansion and inside the kislevite allies book is all the history of kislev, the way their armies and foot soldiers work and then their list to take with your regular imperial list.
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Inarticulate on October 08, 2009, 08:45:23 PM
if Kislev became a State of the Empire, in political terms, they'd be way too powerful for the other Elector's likings.
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Derek Contyre on October 09, 2009, 08:47:46 AM
I didn't mean them to become a political state but they are sort of under our protection.
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: wissenlander on October 13, 2009, 07:02:37 PM
Kislev could easily be a stand alone army, and if not for the redundancy issued by multiple human armies would stand a good chance at being one (already tinkered with a bit).  If they are 'already apart of the Empire' than so is Tilea and Estalia.

Fluff wise, at the moment, there is no way that Kislev would bow to the Emperor. 
Title: Re: Lord Knights
Post by: Toro_Blanco on October 13, 2009, 08:08:54 PM
Kislevite winged lancers would make an excellent rare choice, one I'd build an entirely new army just so I could justify (fluff wise) taking them!

However the nature of Kislev, both politically and socially, does seem to prevent having them fully reintroduced in an Empire army book.  I think a few Kislev units here or there (representing allies sent south to help out in turn) would be an ideal and realistic option; I love the idea of an alternate Kislev army list presented as a supplement, but I doubt that will happen.