home

Poll

Should we allow Foot Knights OR Full Plate Swordsmen OR not?

Foot Knights
82 (52.9%)
Full Plate Swordsmen
23 (14.8%)
No infantry with Full Plate and Shield option
50 (32.3%)

Total Members Voted: 145

Author Topic: POLL - Foot Knights / Full Plate swordsmen  (Read 29933 times)

Offline Warlord

  • Global Moderator
  • Posts: 10112
  • Sydney, Australia
POLL - Foot Knights / Full Plate swordsmen
« on: May 20, 2009, 02:13:38 AM »
So that this topic doesn't spill into EVERY other topic here regarding infantry upgrades / overhauls, can we please keep the thoughts regarding Foot knights / Full plate swordsmen here?

Before voting, at least read this general outline of what each one would generally have access to:

Foot Knights
They have the same stats as knights (without mount)
They are allowed a magic banner (same as knights)
They are unable to take detachments.
They often can be subject to 'order' upgrades.

Full Plate Swordsmen
They have the same stats as swordsmen except are allowed Full Plate Armour
They have all the regular state troop rules (detachments, magic banner, etc.).

No Infantry with Full Plate and Shield option
Infantry with the option of a 2+ AS in combat will exaggerate the current swordsmen syndrome we are already subject to. They would become must haves, regardless of the slot they take because they would be by far and away the BEST infantry we would have access to, and would appear in EVERY Empire army.

Let the voting and discussion begin!
« Last Edit: May 21, 2009, 03:00:17 PM by Warlord »
Quote from: Gneisenau
I hate people who don't paint their armies, hate them with all my guts. Beats me how they value other things over painting, like eating or brushing teeth.

Offline Toro_Blanco

  • Posts: 846
  • Nobody enjoys a good laugh more than I do.
Re: POLL - Foot Knights / Full Plate swordsmen
« Reply #1 on: May 20, 2009, 04:16:10 AM »
I must respectfully disagree about your statement on which slot they take; if they're a special, they must compete with the other very nice choices we have there.  However, I will agree that they would replace greatswords entirely (who's going to take full plate and GW or HW when they can have full plate, HW, and SHIELD? A minority, that's who).

I think it's important we clarify if they're being taken as special or core, because this could affect a lot of people's stance on it, mine in particular.  Rare is out of the question, just silly.

I'll vote under the assumption it would be a core choice.
The first school of thought is that the ragged-assed Stirlanders, not having two coppers to rub together, nicked it when an elven envoy was passing through the area and had hopped off it to take a pee behind a tree

Offline Warlord

  • Global Moderator
  • Posts: 10112
  • Sydney, Australia
Re: POLL - Foot Knights / Full Plate swordsmen
« Reply #2 on: May 20, 2009, 04:30:54 AM »
I think a special choice is appropriate to talk about also. Dismounted knights would have Ld8 afterall, and should not be as common as knights on foot.

Most people suggest that any upgrade to full plate should automatically go to special or rare because full plate should not be that common, so considering them in at least the special slot should also be done.
Quote from: Gneisenau
I hate people who don't paint their armies, hate them with all my guts. Beats me how they value other things over painting, like eating or brushing teeth.

Offline Toro_Blanco

  • Posts: 846
  • Nobody enjoys a good laugh more than I do.
Re: POLL - Foot Knights / Full Plate swordsmen
« Reply #3 on: May 20, 2009, 04:36:30 AM »
Well, making full plate infantry a core choice is practically begging them to replace state troops.

Perhaps if they carry 0-1, or maybe a rule that they don't count towards minimum core units, or you must have more knights/state troops than dismounted knights?

Just because they're great doesn't mean we can't put limits on them, and I don't care so much about seeing them in EVERY army, as long as they have limits and drawbacks to ensure OTHER units are a competitive choice.
The first school of thought is that the ragged-assed Stirlanders, not having two coppers to rub together, nicked it when an elven envoy was passing through the area and had hopped off it to take a pee behind a tree

Offline Warlord

  • Global Moderator
  • Posts: 10112
  • Sydney, Australia
Re: POLL - Foot Knights / Full Plate swordsmen
« Reply #4 on: May 20, 2009, 04:44:24 AM »
Fair enough.
Lots of people think that having 0-1 or more units of knights makes it ok. I'm not trying to convince anyone here, and a discussion of how everyone thinks it should be done is entirely appropriate to have here.
Quote from: Gneisenau
I hate people who don't paint their armies, hate them with all my guts. Beats me how they value other things over painting, like eating or brushing teeth.

Offline Toro_Blanco

  • Posts: 846
  • Nobody enjoys a good laugh more than I do.
Re: POLL - Foot Knights / Full Plate swordsmen
« Reply #5 on: May 20, 2009, 04:47:32 AM »
Fair enough.
Lots of people think that having 0-1 or more units of knights makes it ok. I'm not trying to convince anyone here, and a discussion of how everyone thinks it should be done is entirely appropriate to have here.

It's not that I think it's okay, it's that we're discussing the unit and what to do about them if they were added.  I don't want them if they just replace all other infantry as the default "too good to pass up" unit; I agree that without limits or drawbacks, they WILL make our current swordsmen problem seem trivial in comparison.

I'm throwing out ideas that I want to discuss that might balance them, or make the other infantry competitive.  If you think 0-1 or more knights/state troopers is a terrible idea, please feel free to tell me why and propose a counter idea.  If you think we should just plain not introduce them, I'm on your side for the moment; I think that without some serious balancing, they're better off left out of the army.
The first school of thought is that the ragged-assed Stirlanders, not having two coppers to rub together, nicked it when an elven envoy was passing through the area and had hopped off it to take a pee behind a tree

Offline Warlord

  • Global Moderator
  • Posts: 10112
  • Sydney, Australia
Re: POLL - Foot Knights / Full Plate swordsmen
« Reply #6 on: May 20, 2009, 05:20:20 AM »
Toro, I think we are both on the same page. I am in the "always don't introduce" camp, but I don't want my opinion to stifle debate.
Quote from: Gneisenau
I hate people who don't paint their armies, hate them with all my guts. Beats me how they value other things over painting, like eating or brushing teeth.

Offline IsThisIt

  • Posts: 139
Re: POLL - Foot Knights / Full Plate swordsmen
« Reply #7 on: May 20, 2009, 07:42:15 AM »
I think it would be interesting if there was a magic item, or upgrade of some sort, in which the Lord of the army practices the art of fighting with shield in hand.  Maybe there could be a 50 point magic shield that only the GoTE can take that would grant the ability to give shields to one unit of Greatswords or something. 

Or a special character or something along those lines making you invest greatly in achieving the mythical 2+ save in close combat.  If it was too easily available, without a 0-1 restriction, it would make everything else on foot obsolete. 

Offline Captain Gerntass

  • Posts: 281
  • For the Emperor, the Empire & Sigmar
Re: POLL - Foot Knights / Full Plate swordsmen
« Reply #8 on: May 20, 2009, 08:40:09 AM »
I deffinately think there should be a foot knight option as it would take time for replacement horses to be bred and raised for war so it would be a reasonable bet that many knights a stuck fight some battals on foot becouse their steeds got shot/sliced from under neath them but I'd say for every unit of foot knights a player would need to field a mounted version OR you can't have more foot knights then there are state troops and keep them as a core choice  :::cheers:::
Long live the Crown of Solland

Offline Uryens de Crux

  • Posts: 3751
Re: POLL - Foot Knights / Full Plate swordsmen
« Reply #9 on: May 20, 2009, 10:12:05 AM »
I'd make them rare choices, an alternative to taking Flaggies (speaking as someone who doesnt use HRB, Stanks or Flaggies in his army)
We go to gain a little patch of ground that hath in it no profit but the name.
The Free Company of Solland

The Barony of Wusterburg

Offline Dunrik

  • Posts: 680
  • Alexander von Wolfenberg
Re: POLL - Foot Knights / Full Plate swordsmen
« Reply #10 on: May 20, 2009, 12:11:58 PM »
A no from me. I can live with foot knights, but they have at least to be special, though I would prefer the foot knights to have heavy armour instead.
RIP Rufas/Ironmonger

"You must not fear death, my lads; defy him, and you drive him into the enemy's ranks."
Napoleon Bonaparte

My blog, http://wolfenbergtimes.blogspot.com/

Offline Obi

  • Posts: 6225
  • Rest in peace Nate
Re: POLL - Foot Knights / Full Plate swordsmen
« Reply #11 on: May 20, 2009, 12:21:04 PM »
Yes, foot knights would be awesome. They'd have to cost 12 points each though, IMO.

The slot choice is hard though. If they're special no one would take GS anymore.

Therefore, my take:



One unit of Greatswords may be upgraded to Foot Knights, for +2 pts/model.

Foot knights
- Knight rules
- No mount
- MAY take the steel standard (not so bad now, is it?)
- They have full plate, shield and HW. May also keep their GW for +1 pt/model.
- May be upgraded to IC foot knights for +3 pts/model, if so they count as a rare choice.
- MAY be joined by the TGM.

Hello Athiuen and welcome to the Back Table.

caveat lector
I killed a duck with a spear, can't read train timetables though
"To be is to do"-Socrates;
"To do is to be"-Sartre;
"Do Be Do Be Do"-Sinatra

Offline commandant

  • Posts: 7403
Re: POLL - Foot Knights / Full Plate swordsmen
« Reply #12 on: May 20, 2009, 02:02:01 PM »
I am interested in why people are ok with knights on horses being core and knights on foot not being core.   If you want to protect your state troops point out that they are knights and therefore can't have detatchments which is about the only reason for having state troops anyway.

Offline Toro_Blanco

  • Posts: 846
  • Nobody enjoys a good laugh more than I do.
Re: POLL - Foot Knights / Full Plate swordsmen
« Reply #13 on: May 20, 2009, 02:05:41 PM »
I am interested in why people are ok with knights on horses being core and knights on foot not being core.   If you want to protect your state troops point out that they are knights and therefore can't have detatchments which is about the only reason for having state troops anyway.

This would work fluff-wise, but we have an issue with it because people would simply load up on knights and foot knights, and take a few token militia to redirect charges.  You wouldn't SEE state troops except from players who put fluff before strategy.

Speaking as someone who's designed rules for a number of game systems, if an option is TOO GOOD to pass up, it's either overpowered or the other options are underpowered.  Foot knights would likely become the too-good-to-ignore infantry if that happened, and a lot of us are very strongly opposed to the Empire army basically being foot knights and cavalry.  It doesn't fit with the fluff and it's boring.
The first school of thought is that the ragged-assed Stirlanders, not having two coppers to rub together, nicked it when an elven envoy was passing through the area and had hopped off it to take a pee behind a tree

Offline commandant

  • Posts: 7403
Re: POLL - Foot Knights / Full Plate swordsmen
« Reply #14 on: May 20, 2009, 02:14:35 PM »
I am interested in why people are ok with knights on horses being core and knights on foot not being core.   If you want to protect your state troops point out that they are knights and therefore can't have detatchments which is about the only reason for having state troops anyway.

This would work fluff-wise, but we have an issue with it because people would simply load up on knights and foot knights, and take a few token militia to redirect charges.  You wouldn't SEE state troops except from players who put fluff before strategy.

Speaking as someone who's designed rules for a number of game systems, if an option is TOO GOOD to pass up, it's either overpowered or the other options are underpowered.  Foot knights would likely become the too-good-to-ignore infantry if that happened, and a lot of us are very strongly opposed to the Empire army basically being foot knights and cavalry.  It doesn't fit with the fluff and it's boring.

Then make them expensive or put a limit on them.   for example and correct me if I'm wrong

Knight                M8 WS4 BS3 S3 T3 I3 W1 A1 L8(+1) 23 points (movement 8 for horse)
1+AS/ S5 on charge
Foot Knight        M4 WS3 BS3 S3 T3 I3 A1 L7 9 points
4+ AS/ Greatweapon

The problem is that foot knights should be more plentyful then mounted knights.   I was going to put a 0-1 per 1000 points limit on them but I decided that that is silly when its not on mounted knights.   I think leaving them at 10 points should do the trick.   Now you are paying 3 points for +1 AS, -1 WS (+0 AS in combat) and a Great Weapon.   They are for all intents and purposes Greatswords that are not stubborn.

I am not sure about the -1 WS.   I put it in to show that the dismounted knights are the younger ones that have not been training for as long.   It was a common tactic by medievel commanders to dismount their knights to stop them rushing into combat and I was thinking that as pistolliers are meant to be hot headed that the first thing that the Knight Commanders do when the new pistolliers enrol to be knights is dismount them to calm them down a bit and make them more controllable

Offline Toro_Blanco

  • Posts: 846
  • Nobody enjoys a good laugh more than I do.
Re: POLL - Foot Knights / Full Plate swordsmen
« Reply #15 on: May 20, 2009, 02:21:19 PM »
Then make them expensive or put a limit on them.   for example and correct me if I'm wrong
That's what this thread is for, my good man.  Discussing limits or cost, and in general how to make sure that if we got such a unit, how it would be balanced.

Knight                M8 WS4 BS3 S3 T3 I3 W1 A1 L8(+1) 23 points (movement 8 for horse)
1+AS/ S5 on charge
Foot Knight        M4 WS3 BS3 S3 T3 I3 A1 L7 9 points
4+ AS/ Greatweapon

The problem is that foot knights should be more plentyful then mounted knights.   
What makes you say that?  Certainly that was the case in medieval Europe, but from what I gather from the fluff knights in the Empire are part of private orders with nobles and their squires forming their numbers, rather than a mainstay of the state army.  I could easily believe that the reason we don't see dismounted knights is simply because their men go from training or the pistoliers straight into cavalry combat, and never spend time on foot.  This is why I'm not sure I even want them in the first place.

Don't get me wrong, they are an awesome unit and would look fantastic, but they just don't seem to fit the fluff for the Empire.

I was going to put a 0-1 per 1000 points limit on them but I decided that that is silly when its not on mounted knights.   I think leaving them at 10 points should do the trick.   Now you are paying 3 points for +1 AS, -1 WS (+0 AS in combat) and a Great Weapon.   They are for all intents and purposes Greatswords that are not stubborn.

I am not sure about the -1 WS.   I put it in to show that the dismounted knights are the younger ones that have not been training for as long.   It was a common tactic by medievel commanders to dismount their knights to stop them rushing into combat and I was thinking that as pistolliers are meant to be hot headed that the first thing that the Knight Commanders do when the new pistolliers enrol to be knights is dismount them to calm them down a bit and make them more controllable

Interesting ideas, let me ponder that for a bit before responding...
The first school of thought is that the ragged-assed Stirlanders, not having two coppers to rub together, nicked it when an elven envoy was passing through the area and had hopped off it to take a pee behind a tree

Offline der Hurenwiebel

  • Posts: 1078
  • Adversus Malum Pugnamus
Re: POLL - Foot Knights / Full Plate swordsmen
« Reply #16 on: May 21, 2009, 05:15:12 AM »
I could see these foot knights as being armed with full plate and halberd (pollaxe) inner circle or regular options and able to strike on initiative as opposed to always last.  regular could be a shade cheaper than great swords and inner circle a shade more, for the added st and lack of stubborn characteristics.  Another option could be to call them veterans for a couple of points and they simply get to ignore the first break or panic test. 
"DEfighter wrote:
Hey, trolls stay the hell out, this is a serious thread. Empire are cheese. 2 steam tanks, a war altar and 4 cannons is so obviously overpowered. Anyone who thinks otherwise clearly hasn't had their dragon shot down on turn 1 yet."

oh really now.  LOL ROFLMAO oh the irony.

Offline Warlord

  • Global Moderator
  • Posts: 10112
  • Sydney, Australia
Re: POLL - Foot Knights / Full Plate swordsmen
« Reply #17 on: May 21, 2009, 08:17:52 AM »
Keep in mind the rough outline I placed in the first post though, regarding foot knights and full plate swordsmen having access to shields being the key component to this discussion. Foot knights without shield and a variety of other options is an entirely different point...
Quote from: Gneisenau
I hate people who don't paint their armies, hate them with all my guts. Beats me how they value other things over painting, like eating or brushing teeth.

Offline commandant

  • Posts: 7403
Re: POLL - Foot Knights / Full Plate swordsmen
« Reply #18 on: May 21, 2009, 11:00:52 AM »
Keep in mind the rough outline I placed in the first post though, regarding foot knights and full plate swordsmen having access to shields being the key component to this discussion. Foot knights without shield and a variety of other options is an entirely different point...

I believe we should have foot knights but I don't believe that they should have shields.   Rather our footknights should be like our greatswords only not as good and cheaper

Offline der Hurenwiebel

  • Posts: 1078
  • Adversus Malum Pugnamus
Re: POLL - Foot Knights / Full Plate swordsmen
« Reply #19 on: May 21, 2009, 04:17:45 PM »
well on that note I could see two options for the foot knights the same basic profile for the knight with a limited form of stubborness like the veteran rule I proposed, then with an armament option of pollaxe or weapon and shield.  The difference being either survivability and thus static combat res, or a little more punch with a heavier weapon without losing much survivability in most circumstances.
"DEfighter wrote:
Hey, trolls stay the hell out, this is a serious thread. Empire are cheese. 2 steam tanks, a war altar and 4 cannons is so obviously overpowered. Anyone who thinks otherwise clearly hasn't had their dragon shot down on turn 1 yet."

oh really now.  LOL ROFLMAO oh the irony.

Offline Inarticulate

  • Posts: 1599
Re: POLL - Foot Knights / Full Plate swordsmen
« Reply #20 on: May 23, 2009, 05:08:34 PM »
Perhaps you can take Foot Knights if a Grandmaster leads the army?

Same as we were thinking Greatswords can only be taken with a GoTE.
I for one welcome our new flying cat overlords.

Offline Feanor Fire Heart

  • His Royal Highness
  • Posts: 4768
Re: POLL - Foot Knights / Full Plate swordsmen
« Reply #21 on: May 23, 2009, 06:16:44 PM »
Honestly I feel the greatswords fill the role of a foot knight.  Giving him full plate with sword and board seems rather stale as its just improving the standard AS by 1.  sure they fight a slight bit better but I still feel the GS provide the role of a foot knight.
Something we as painters and hobbyists should always remember:
“Dude, suckin’ at something is the first step to being sorta good at something.”
― Jake the Dog

Offline Merrick

  • Posts: 3302
  • I say!
    • http://www.facebook.com/WinHereWinThereWinWinEverywhere
Re: POLL - Foot Knights / Full Plate swordsmen
« Reply #22 on: May 23, 2009, 06:22:11 PM »
To be honest, I would find Infantry with a 2+ save very silly........

Offline t12161991

  • Posts: 3395
  • Let's Go Blue!
Re: POLL - Foot Knights / Full Plate swordsmen
« Reply #23 on: May 23, 2009, 06:43:36 PM »
Already done.

Ironbreakers/Chaos Warriors/Chosen Chaos Warriors.
Grutch:  Careful, someone I know on a forum I visit works for Sony.  He says they aren't to be trusted.

Hail! to the victors valiant
Hail! to the conqu'ring heroes
Hail! Hail! to Michigan
The leaders and best!

10-2

Offline Merrick

  • Posts: 3302
  • I say!
    • http://www.facebook.com/WinHereWinThereWinWinEverywhere
Re: POLL - Foot Knights / Full Plate swordsmen
« Reply #24 on: May 23, 2009, 07:39:25 PM »
I shall reword it.

I would find Empire infantry with 2+ saves very silly.